[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A42B093.4070702@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:02:43 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, ray-lk@...rabbit.org,
renton@...ton.name, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: devpts mounts too slowly
Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>
>>> umounts do not appear affected; each umount still take negible time.
>> I think I know what's going on. /sbin/mount is linked against libselinux
>> /sbin/umount is not. And FPOS in question blows if you
>> * do not have selinuxfs mounted (e.g. because selinux is not enabled)
>> * have a lot of mounts.
>>
>> What happens is that this piece of crap checks for presence of selinuxfs
>> on /selinux; then, if the thing isn't there, we go and scan the entire
>> /proc/mounts in search of selinuxfs mounts.
>>
>> If akpm has selinux enabled on his testbox and you don't have it on yours,
>> we have all observations explained.
>
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX=y
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM=y
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM_VALUE=1
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE=y
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DEVELOP=y
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_AVC_STATS=y
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_CHECKREQPROT_VALUE=1
> # CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_ENABLE_SECMARK_DEFAULT is not set
> # CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_POLICYDB_VERSION_MAX is not set
>
Wow. It doesn't even check for selinux actually being enabled before
embarking on this stupidity.
FAIL.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists