On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 22:18 +0200, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote: > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > index cb0d0ff..6b4694a 100644 > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > @@ -74,13 +74,12 @@ enum integrity_status ima_get_cache_status(struct > > integrity_iint_cache *iint, > > return iint->ima_mmap_status; > > case BPRM_CHECK: > > return iint->ima_bprm_status; > > - case MODULE_CHECK: > > - return iint->ima_module_status; > > - case FIRMWARE_CHECK: > > - return iint->ima_firmware_status; > > case FILE_CHECK: > > - default: > > + case POST_SETATTR: > > return iint->ima_file_status; > > + case MODULE_CHECK ... MAX_CHECK - 1: > > Will LLVM clang handles this range? > > Otherwise it can be just like: > > case MODULE_CHECK ... MAX_CHECK :
Yes, my test program compiled fine with clang. Similar usage exists in the kernel (eg. fs/afs/callback.c). Mimi _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
