Re: SELinux + ubifs: possible circular locking dependency

[Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1731 bytes --]

On 02/14/2013 01:08 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 12:56 +0100, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>> On 02/14/2013 08:15 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>>> Mark, how about this one? I compiled it and ran on my fedora 16 with
>>> SElinux enabled, no obvious issues.
>>>
>>> From a19350097200570571aa522afebb96b34db534f4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com>
>>> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 09:07:36 +0200
>>> Subject: [PATCH] selinux: do not confuse lockdep
>>>
>>> Selinux has per-inode mutexes called 'isec->lock', and they are initialized in
>>> the same place, which makes lockdep treat all of the them as if they were
>>> identical. However, locking rules may be a little bit different depending on
>>> the file-system, so we should put these locks to separate classes, just like we
>>> do for 'i_mutex'. Namely, we should put them to per-FS type classes, which is
>>> exactly what this patch does.
>>>
>>> The problem this patch intends to fix is a strange lockdep warning, which I,
>>> frankly speaking, do not really understand, but I believe the root-cause should
>>> be fixed by this patch.
>>
>> Thanks, this works with mainline, but not with my xattr patch series
>> applied.
> 
> Hmm, probably I have to annotate the ui mutex. Let's drop security
> mailing lists from the loop so far, I'll come up with a patch tomorrow.

Do you have a patch I can test?

Marc
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 263 bytes --]