Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Oct 2023 14:13:13 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] apparmor: cache buffers on percpu list if there is lock, contention |
| |
On (23/10/17 02:21), John Johansen wrote: > > > yeah, testing help is always much appreciated. I have a v4, and I am > > > working on 3 alternate version to compare against, to help give a better > > > sense if we can get away with simplifying or tweak the scaling. > > > > > > I should be able to post them out some time tonight. > > > > Hi John, > > > > Did you get a chance to post v4? I may be able to give it some testing > > on our real-life case. > > sorry yes, how about a v5. That is simplified with 3 follow on patches > that aren't strictly necessary, but some combination of them might be > better than just the base patch, but splitting them out makes the > individual changes easier to review.
Sorry for late reply. So I gave it a try but, apparently, our build environment has changed quite significantly since the last time I looked into it.
I don't see that many aa_get/put_buffer() anymore. apparmor buffer functions are mostly called form the exec path:
security_bprm_creds_for_exec() apparmor_bprm_creds_for_exec() make_vfsuid() aa_get_buffer()
As for vfs_statx()->...->apparmor_inode_getattr()->aa_path_perm(), that path is bpf_lsm_inode_getsecid() now.
| |