From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
To: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
anton@samba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: speedup for syscalls when auditing is disabled
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:56:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1282586177.2681.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <29151.1282270393@neuling.org>
On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 12:13 +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
> We found that when auditing is disabled using "auditctl -D", that
> there's still a significant overhead when doing syscalls. This overhead
> is not present when a single never rule is inserted using "auditctl -a
> task,never".
>
> Using Anton's null syscall microbenchmark from
> http://ozlabs.org/~anton/junkcode/null_syscall.c we currently have on a
> powerpc machine:
>
> # auditctl -D
> No rules
> # ./null_syscall
> null_syscall: 739.03 cycles 100.00%
> # auditctl -a task,never
> # ./null_syscall
> null_syscall: 204.63 cycles 100.00%
>
> This doesn't seem right, as we'd hope that auditing would have the same
> minimal impact when disabled via -D as when we have a single never rule.
>
> The patch below creates a fast path when initialising a task. If the
> rules list for tasks is empty (the disabled -D option), we mark auditing
> as disabled for this task.
>
> When this is applied, our null syscall benchmark improves in the
> disabled case to match the single never rule case.
>
> # auditctl -D
> No rules
> # ./null_syscall
> null_syscall: 204.62 cycles 100.00%
> # auditctl -a task,never
> # ./null_syscall
> null_syscall: 204.63 cycles 100.00%
>
> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
> ---
> I'm not familiar with the auditing code/infrastructure so I may have
> misunderstood something here
>
> diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c
> index 1b31c13..1cd6ec7 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditsc.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
> @@ -666,6 +666,11 @@ static enum audit_state audit_filter_task(struct task_struct *tsk, char **key)
> enum audit_state state;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> + /* Fast path. If the list is empty, disable auditing */
> + if (list_empty(&audit_filter_list[AUDIT_FILTER_TASK])) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return AUDIT_DISABLED;
> + }
> list_for_each_entry_rcu(e, &audit_filter_list[AUDIT_FILTER_TASK], list) {
> if (audit_filter_rules(tsk, &e->rule, NULL, NULL, &state)) {
> if (state == AUDIT_RECORD_CONTEXT)
I don't think this works at all. I don't see how syscall audit'ing can
work. What if I have nothing in the AUDIT_FILTER_TASK list but I want
to audit all 'open(2)' syscalls? This patch is going to leave the task
in the DISABLED state and we won't ever be able to match on the syscall
rules.
I wonder if you could get much back, in terms of performance, by moving
the
context->dummy = !audit_n_rules;
line to the top and just returning if context->dummy == 1;
I'll play a bit, but I thought that was supposed to be a safe thing to
do....
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-23 17:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-20 2:13 [PATCH] audit: speedup for syscalls when auditing is disabled Michael Neuling
2010-08-23 17:56 ` Eric Paris [this message]
2010-08-24 2:11 ` Michael Neuling
2010-08-24 3:43 ` Eric Paris
2010-08-24 5:56 ` Michael Neuling
2010-08-24 5:56 ` Michael Neuling
2010-08-24 20:06 ` Eric Paris
2010-08-24 15:14 ` Miloslav Trmac
2010-08-24 15:17 ` Eric Paris
2010-08-25 3:11 ` Michael Neuling
2010-08-25 11:59 ` Eric Paris
2010-08-26 3:34 ` Anton Blanchard
2010-08-27 17:49 ` Eric Paris
2010-08-24 2:16 ` Anton Blanchard
2010-08-24 3:51 ` Eric Paris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1282586177.2681.43.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox