[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1591797185.5140.2.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:53:05 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
Cc: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] [ima] 8eb613c0b8: stress-ng.icache.ops_per_sec -84.2%
regression
Hi Xing,
On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 11:21 +0800, Xing Zhengjun wrote:
> Hi Mimi,
>
> Do you have time to take a look at this? we noticed a 3.7%
> regression of boot-time.dhcp and a 84.2% regression of
> stress-ng.icache.ops_per_sec. Thanks.
>
> On 6/3/2020 5:11 PM, kernel test robot wrote:
> > Greeting,
> >
> > FYI, we noticed a 3.7% regression of boot-time.dhcp due to commit:
> >
> >
> > commit: 8eb613c0b8f19627ba1846dcf78bb2c85edbe8dd ("ima: verify mprotect change is consistent with mmap policy")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> >
> > in testcase: stress-ng
> > on test machine: 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 192G memory
> > with following parameters:
> >
> > nr_threads: 100%
> > disk: 1HDD
> > testtime: 30s
> > class: cpu-cache
> > cpufreq_governor: performance
> > ucode: 0x500002c
Does the following change resolve it?
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index c44414a7f82e..78e1dfc8a3f2 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -426,7 +426,8 @@ int ima_file_mprotect(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long prot)
int pcr;
/* Is mprotect making an mmap'ed file executable? */
- if (!vma->vm_file || !(prot & PROT_EXEC) || (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC))
+ if (!(ima_policy_flag & IMA_APPRAISE) || !vma->vm_file ||
+ !(prot & PROT_EXEC) || (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC))
return 0;
security_task_getsecid(current, &secid);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists