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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=ham 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 134ABC433DF for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD5F207C3 for ; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727836AbgFKKxm (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 06:53:42 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:50976 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727037AbgFKKxl (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 06:53:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 05BAZKU8087824; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 06:53:37 -0400 Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 31kgry4mah-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 06:53:37 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 05BApHBe005728; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:35 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 31g2s81g89-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:35 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 05BArX2q58458278 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:33 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04614203F; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F0A42042; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.183.79]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:53:32 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <1591872811.5140.41.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [LKP] [ima] 8eb613c0b8: stress-ng.icache.ops_per_sec -84.2% regression From: Mimi Zohar To: Xing Zhengjun , kernel test robot Cc: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 06:53:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <20200603091150.GH12456@shao2-debian> <099cfe59-1601-a0fc-3849-13eee8754130@linux.intel.com> <1591797185.5140.2.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216,18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-11_10:2020-06-10,2020-06-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2006110082 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 15:10 +0800, Xing Zhengjun wrote: > On 6/10/2020 9:53 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > ucode: 0x500002c > > > > Does the following change resolve it? > > > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > > index c44414a7f82e..78e1dfc8a3f2 100644 > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > > @@ -426,7 +426,8 @@ int ima_file_mprotect(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long prot) > > int pcr; > > > > /* Is mprotect making an mmap'ed file executable? */ > > - if (!vma->vm_file || !(prot & PROT_EXEC) || (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)) > > + if (!(ima_policy_flag & IMA_APPRAISE) || !vma->vm_file || > > + !(prot & PROT_EXEC) || (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)) > > return 0; > > > > security_task_getsecid(current, &secid); > > > Thanks. I test the change, it can resolve the regression. Thanks! Can I get your "Tested-by" tag? Mimi