# Re: \[PATCH 13/13\] security: convert VMA flag tests to use vma\_flags\_t

- From: Fan Wu \<wufan@kernel.org\>
- Date: 2026-11-06 02:13:51 
- List: linuxppc-dev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linuxppc-dev/2026/11/17875116
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-mm/2026/11/17874173/t.md

```text
On 11/5/2026 5:22 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2026 at 6:17 PM Paul Moore [ref] wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2026 at 4:35 PM Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) [ref] wrote:
>> >
>> > Replace use of the legacy vm_flags_t flags with vma_flags_t values in the
>> > mmap and mprotect LSM hooks of SELinux, AppArmor, IMA and IPE.
>> >
>> > No functional change intended.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <ljs@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  security/apparmor/lsm.c           |  2 +-
>> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c |  2 +-
>> >  security/ipe/hooks.c              |  2 +-
>> >  security/selinux/hooks.c          | 14 +++++++-------
>> >  4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> Similar to the other patchset you just posted, is there any reason why
>> individual subsystem maintainers can't pick these patches up, or is
>> there some reason I'm missing and they need to go through a single
>> tree?
>>
>> If they can go through multiple trees, can you split this patch up?
>> AppArmor, Integrity/IMA, IPE, and SELinux are all maintained by
>> different groups/people.
> 
> Since there seems to be a desire to bypass normal procedure in favor
> of speed (surely that will never backfire), the SELinux changes look
> fine to me, but please do wait to hear from the AppArmor, IMA, and IPE
> maintainers before merging this patch.
> 
> Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
> 

For the IPE part:

Acked-by: Fan Wu <wufan@kernel.org>

```