[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: RCU issue with SELinux (Re: SELINUX performance issues)
Hi Stephen, thanks for your comment.

> > You are right. Indeed, the lock for hash bucket is also necessary
> > when avc_insert() is called. I fixed them.
> avc_has_perm* can be called from interrupt or bh, e.g. send_sigio or
> sock_rcv_skb. So using just spin_lock/spin_unlock rather than
> spin_lock_irqsave/restore is unsafe, right?

Indeed, spin_lock/spin_unlock should be replaced by spin_lock_irqsave/restore.
I fixed it.

The attached take3-patch is modified as follows:
- avc_node_dual was eliminated by Paul E.McKenny's suggestion.
avc_update_node() calls kmalloc() and may return -ENOMEM.
(But, I think this effect is so limited.)
- All list_for_each_entry() were replaced by list_for_each_entry_rcu().
- All spin_lock()/spin_unlock() were replaced by spin_lock_irqsave()
- In avc_node_insert(), if an entry with the same ssid/tsid/tclass as new
one exists, the older entry is replaced by the new one.

Thanks. I want to make it the last edition hopefully. :)

Kai Gai <>
[unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream][unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.109 / U:1.188 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site