[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhSW7cOjGpf0RA355ytw_s=X+JGZax8G-ZEuF6u4kOeUuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 17:43:58 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] selinux: avoid nf hooks overhead when not needed
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
> On 4/6/2016 2:51 AM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> Currently, selinux always registers iptables POSTROUTING hooks regarless of
>> the running policy needs for any action to be performed by them.
>>
>> Even the socket_sock_rcv_skb() is always registered, but it can result in a no-op
>> depending on the current policy configuration.
>>
>> The above invocations in the kernel datapath are cause of measurable
>> overhead in networking performance test.
>>
>> This patch series adds explicit notification for netlabel status change
>> (other relevant status change, like xfrm and secmark, are already notified to
>> LSM) and use this information in selinux to register the above hooks only when
>> the current status makes them relevant, deregistering them when no-op
>>
>> Avoiding the LSM hooks overhead, in netperf UDP_STREAM test with small packets,
>> gives about 5% performance improvement on rx and about 8% on tx.
>>
>> Paolo Abeni (2):
>> security: add hook for netlabel status change notification
>> selinux: implement support for dynamic net hook [de-]registration
>>
>> include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 6 ++++
>> include/linux/security.h | 5 +++
>> net/netlabel/netlabel_cipso_v4.c | 8 +++--
>> net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c | 5 ++-
>> security/security.c | 7 ++++
>> security/selinux/hooks.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>> security/selinux/include/security.h | 1 +
>> security/selinux/ss/services.c | 1 +
>> security/selinux/xfrm.c | 4 +++
>> 9 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Is there a patch 1/2?
Yes, there was (it was the "security: add hook ..." patch), but for
some reason it hasn't hit the archive that I normally use. Odd.
I'll fwd the patch to you off-list so as not to spam everyone again.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists