The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 5.2-stable tree.

I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst.

I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to stable@vger.kernel.org and let me know why this patch should be applied. Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be seen again.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------

From 68f2529078f97dd4dc7f01bc4d495cf5f5814363 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: YueHaibing yuehaibing@huawei.com Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 21:40:32 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] ima: Make arch_policy_entry static

Fix sparse warning:

security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:202:23: warning: symbol 'arch_policy_entry' was not declared. Should it be static?

Fixes: 6191706246de ("ima: add support for arch specific policies") Reported-by: Hulk Robot hulkci@huawei.com Signed-off-by: YueHaibing yuehaibing@huawei.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org (linux-5.0) Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar zohar@linux.ibm.com

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c index 1cc822a59054..cd1b7281244e 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry secure_boot_rules[] __ro_after_init = { };

/* An array of architecture specific rules */ -struct ima_rule_entry *arch_policy_entry __ro_after_init; +static struct ima_rule_entry *arch_policy_entry __ro_after_init;

static LIST_HEAD(ima_default_rules); static LIST_HEAD(ima_policy_rules);