[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa987698a5b36713f5d85e1c4c2ce9b6e2abf06c.camel@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2024 18:24:29 +0200
From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: zohar@...ux.ibm.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com,
eric.snowberg@...cle.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
ebpqwerty472123@...il.com, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ima: Remove inode lock
On Wed, 2024-10-09 at 11:36 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 12:57 PM Roberto Sassu
> <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> >
> > Move out the mutex in the ima_iint_cache structure to a new structure
> > called ima_iint_cache_lock, so that a lock can be taken regardless of
> > whether or not inode integrity metadata are stored in the inode.
> >
> > Introduce ima_inode_security() to simplify accessing the new structure in
> > the inode security blob.
> >
> > Move the mutex initialization and annotation in the new function
> > ima_inode_alloc_security() and introduce ima_iint_lock() and
> > ima_iint_unlock() to respectively lock and unlock the mutex.
> >
> > Finally, expand the critical region in process_measurement() guarded by
> > iint->mutex up to where the inode was locked, use only one iint lock in
> > __ima_inode_hash(), since the mutex is now in the inode security blob, and
> > replace the inode_lock()/inode_unlock() calls in ima_check_last_writer().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > ---
> > security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 26 ++++++++---
> > security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c | 4 +-
> > security/integrity/ima/ima_iint.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 39 +++++++---------
> > 4 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
>
> I'm not an IMA expert, but it looks reasonable to me, although
> shouldn't this carry a stable CC in the patch metadata?
>
> Reviewed-by: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Thanks, will add in the new version.
Roberto
Powered by blists - more mailing lists