From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50081C433DF for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 20:49:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18965206EB for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 20:49:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="U7uFJoIS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726740AbgHYUts (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:49:48 -0400 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]:38300 "EHLO linux.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726294AbgHYUtp (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:49:45 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.104] (c-73-42-176-67.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [73.42.176.67]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABC0820B4908; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:49:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com ABC0820B4908 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1598388585; bh=AXCrYoOoelxGw8+skONas2F/8wHLEi1Bp9lwaPCUfI8=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=U7uFJoIS8to4BZiCjL+j1546Q9llSoY5DX8f2ghawSh1oTxC+zfJOKRc9xKwq9C8g ZA1Is3YmQHcBvOQUsjCaryRSijOFUPPcglq2FqEDjH05GfJpa9i7JSgNrWxLD+FMHH fAe9Ube9843Kw9b6sqxw0b6pNyx7zBTZMvbSz6D8= Subject: Re: [PATCH] SELinux: Measure state and hash of policy using IMA To: Paul Moore Cc: Ondrej Mosnacek , Stephen Smalley , Mimi Zohar , Casey Schaufler , Tyler Hicks , tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com, Sasha Levin , James Morris , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, SElinux list , LSM List , linux-kernel References: <20200822010018.19453-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <418618c4-a0c6-6b28-6718-2726a29b83c5@linux.microsoft.com> From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian Message-ID: <07854807-c495-b7e5-fc44-26d78ff14f1b@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:49:44 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8/24/20 3:18 PM, Paul Moore wrote: Hi Paul, >>>>> Is Ondrej's re-try approach I need to use to workaround policy reload issue? >>>> >>>> No, I think perhaps we should move the mutex to selinux_state instead >>>> of selinux_fs_info. selinux_fs_info has a pointer to selinux_state so >>>> it can then use it indirectly. Note that your patches are going to >>>> conflict with other ongoing work in the selinux next branch that is >>>> refactoring policy load and converting the policy rwlock to RCU. >>> >>> Yeah, and I'm experimenting with a patch on top of Stephen's RCU work >>> that would allow you to do this in a straightforward way without even >>> messing with the fsi->mutex. My patch may or may not be eventually >>> committed, but either way I'd recommend holding off on this for a >>> while until the dust settles around the RCU conversion. >> >> I can make the SELinux\IMA changes in "selinux next branch" taking >> dependencies on Stephen's patches + relevant IMA patches. > > I know it can be frustrating to hear what I'm about to say, but the > best option is probably just to wait a little to let things settle in > the SELinux -next branch. There is a lot of stuff going on right now > with patches flooding in (at least "flooding" from a SELinux kernel > development perspective) and we/I've haven't gotten through all of > them yet. > Could you please let me know when the current set of changes in SELinux next branch would be completed and be ready to take new changes? I mean, roughly - would it be a month from now or you expect that to take longer? thanks, -lakshmi