[PATCH security-next v5 10/30] LSM: Don't ignore initialization failures

From: Kees Cook
Date: Wed Oct 10 2018 - 20:20:02 EST


LSM initialization failures have traditionally been ignored. We should
at least WARN when something goes wrong.

Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
security/security.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c
index 395f804f6a91..2055af907eba 100644
--- a/security/security.c
+++ b/security/security.c
@@ -55,10 +55,12 @@ static __initdata bool debug;
static void __init major_lsm_init(void)
{
struct lsm_info *lsm;
+ int ret;

for (lsm = __start_lsm_info; lsm < __end_lsm_info; lsm++) {
init_debug("initializing %s\n", lsm->name);
- lsm->init();
+ ret = lsm->init();
+ WARN(ret, "%s failed to initialize: %d\n", lsm->name, ret);
}
}

--
2.17.1