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=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 CF4C3C433E0 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 14:23:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FDF2065C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 14:23:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727036AbhAEOXS (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:23:18 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:54736 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726600AbhAEOXS (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:23:18 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1609856511; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Fyy5Be3v4INXlMATEBnRbwSv+oNMJK75sLHgTGDbPUs=; b=DBRoGWvusTMe+5SWTdm1DmGjDAI+A8E5o/azsJ6tUBi5QAt9QJwX5rBw4gX2KSLZWecL59 0c9m7mQ8VmF7CqCU6VGI4wFLtIk3WJqH8kDoFYz52UB3H0VK8T1hTg/t4xhLXYdd4fQ4T5 6FATzm3S4yB7ylFccaf9CTandmWCo+0= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-376-cWu2kG3QN3SyR4dmI5GNcw-1; Tue, 05 Jan 2021 09:21:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: cWu2kG3QN3SyR4dmI5GNcw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B829759; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 14:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from horse.redhat.com (ovpn-117-227.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.117.227]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874615D6CF; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 14:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by horse.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 10451) id 1C219220BCF; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:21:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:21:48 -0500 From: Vivek Goyal To: Ondrej Mosnacek Cc: Paul Moore , James Carter , SElinux list , Stephen Smalley , Daniel Walsh , Zdenek Pytela Subject: Re: virtiofs and its optional xattr support vs. fs_use_xattr Message-ID: <20210105142148.GA3200@redhat.com> References: <20201210221753.GB185111@redhat.com> <20201210223049.GC185111@redhat.com> <20210104201458.GA74084@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: selinux@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 03:00:31PM +0100, Ondrej Mosnacek wrote: [..] > > > > > > > Okay, so I'll look into switching between use_xattr and use_genfs > > > > > > > based on the availability of xattr support and the presence of > > > > > > > corresponding rules in the policy. Thanks everyone for the fruitful > > > > > > > discussion! > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ondrej, > > > > > > > > > > > > So this is now purely a policy change and no changes required in kernel? > > > > > > If yes, then the patch Dan Walsh proposed, is that good enough or > > > > > > it needs to be done in a different way. > > > > > > > > > > No, this needs a kernel change in SELinux to interpret the policy > > > > > rules slightly differently *and* basically Dan's patch (modulo the > > > > > typo in the genfscon keyword). > > > > > > > > Ok, thanks. Is this kernel change something you will be able to take > > > > care of. I am afraid that I don't know enough to make this change. > > > > > > Yes, it's already on my todo list ;) But it might take some time as > > > there are a lot of things competing for my attention right now... > > > > Hi Ondrej, > > > > Sorry to bother you on this. Just curious, if you got a chance to make > > progress on this. Will like to solve the issue of SELinux blocking package > > installation on virtiofs in VM based containers. > > Hi, > > I had a go at it today and I already have a tentative patch. So far > it's passing my initial testing so I should be able to post it to the > list soon. Awesome. Looking forward to the final patch. Vivek