[PATCH] init/main.c: Do jump_label_init before early_security_init

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:34:29PM +0200, KP Singh wrote:
> LSM indirect calls being are now replaced by static calls, this requires
> a jumpt_table_init before early_security_init where LSM hooks and their
> static calls and keys are initialized.
> 
> Fixes: 2732ad5ecd5b ("lsm: replace indirect LSM hook calls with static calls")
> Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh at kernel.org>
> ---
>  init/main.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c
> index 206acdde51f5..5bd45af7a49e 100644
> --- a/init/main.c
> +++ b/init/main.c
> @@ -922,6 +922,8 @@ void start_kernel(void)
>  	boot_cpu_init();
>  	page_address_init();
>  	pr_notice("%s", linux_banner);
> +	/* LSM and command line parameters use static keys */
> +	jump_label_init();
>  	early_security_init();
>  	setup_arch(&command_line);
>  	setup_boot_config();
> @@ -933,8 +935,6 @@ void start_kernel(void)
>  	boot_cpu_hotplug_init();
>  
>  	pr_notice("Kernel command line: %s\n", saved_command_line);
> -	/* parameters may set static keys */
> -	jump_label_init();
>  	parse_early_param();
>  	after_dashes = parse_args("Booting kernel",
>  				  static_command_line, __start___param,
> -- 

I was gonna be very surprised if you could simply change the boot ordering
like that and it would simply work. The early boot order is a nightmare so
without proper audit of what uses which facilities when, you won't be really
successful, I'd say.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette