Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the integrity tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:18:18 +1100

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:

  security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c

between commit:

  2b4a2474a202 ("IMA: generalize keyring specific measurement constructs")

from the integrity tree and commit:

  a2d2329e30e2 ("ima: handle idmapped mounts")

from the pidfd tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
index 1dd70dc68ffd,ed410efb3597..000000000000
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
@@@ -183,17 -184,18 +184,18 @@@ err_out
   * Returns IMA_MEASURE, IMA_APPRAISE mask.
   *
   */
- int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid,
- 		   int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr,
+ int ima_get_action(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, struct inode *inode,
+ 		   const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, int mask,
+ 		   enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr,
  		   struct ima_template_desc **template_desc,
 -		   const char *keyring)
 +		   const char *func_data)
  {
  	int flags = IMA_MEASURE | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_HASH;
  
  	flags &= ima_policy_flag;
  
- 	return ima_match_policy(inode, cred, secid, func, mask, flags, pcr,
- 				template_desc, func_data);
+ 	return ima_match_policy(mnt_userns, inode, cred, secid, func, mask,
 -				flags, pcr, template_desc, keyring);
++				flags, pcr, template_desc, func_data);
  }
  
  /*