From: "Guozihua (Scott)" <guozihua@huawei.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>, <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
<paul@paul-moore.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by ima_filter_rule_match()
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 21:28:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6cd55a0f-366f-45b7-d0e5-4116de454c10@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc34912b2bad1c46f249fb6e2aa2c79e26890699.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On 2022/8/23 21:21, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-08-23 at 16:12 +0800, Guozihua (Scott) wrote:
>>> The question is whether we're waiting for the SELinux policy to change
>>> from ESTALE or whether it is the number of SELinux based IMA policy
>>> rules or some combination of the two. Retrying three times seems to be
>>> random. If SELinux waited for ESTALE to change, then it would only be
>>> dependent on the time it took to update the SELinux based IMA policy
>>> rules.
>>
>> We are waiting for ima_lsm_update_rules() to finish re-initializing all
>> the LSM based rules.
>
> Fine. Hopefully retrying a maximum of 3 times is sufficient.
>
Well, at least this should greatly reduce the chance of this issue from
happening. This would be the best we I can think of without locking and
busy waiting. Maybe we can also add delays before we retry. Maybe you
got any other thought in mind?
--
Best
GUO Zihua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-23 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-18 2:05 [PATCH] ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by ima_filter_rule_match() GUO Zihua
2022-08-18 13:43 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-19 1:50 ` Guozihua (Scott)
2022-08-22 14:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-23 8:12 ` Guozihua (Scott)
2022-08-23 13:21 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-23 13:28 ` Guozihua (Scott) [this message]
2022-08-24 1:26 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-24 1:56 ` Guozihua (Scott)
2022-08-25 13:02 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-27 9:57 ` Guozihua (Scott)
2022-08-30 1:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-30 8:41 ` Guozihua (Scott)
2022-08-30 12:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-08-30 12:13 ` Guozihua (Scott)
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=6cd55a0f-366f-45b7-d0e5-4116de454c10@huawei.com \
--to=guozihua@huawei.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
/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