On 02/20/2018 04:58 PM, Stephen Smalley wrote:

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 08:59 -0500, Stephen Smalley wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 2018-02-19 at 16:18 +0100, Peter Enderborg wrote:

quoted

From: Peter <redacted>

The locks are moved to dynamic allocation, we need to
help the lockdep system to classify the locks.
This adds to lockdep annotation for the page mutex and
for the ss lock.

Signed-off-by: Peter Enderborg <redacted>
---
This is the rebase of suggested patches from selinuxns tree
and are intended to be applyed on top of:
selinux: wrap global selinux state
from Stephen Smalley

 security/selinux/ss/services.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/security/selinux/ss/services.c

b/security/selinux/ss/services.c
index 3698352213d7..a741552e22b5 100644

--- a/security/selinux/ss/services.c
+++ b/security/selinux/ss/services.c

@@ -81,11 +81,15 @@ char

*selinux_policycap_names[__POLICYDB_CAPABILITY_MAX] = {
 };
 
 static struct selinux_ss selinux_ss;
+static struct lock_class_key selinux_ss_class_key;
+static struct lock_class_key selinux_status_class_key;
 
 void selinux_ss_init(struct selinux_ss **ss)
 {
 	rwlock_init(&selinux_ss.policy_rwlock);
+	lockdep_set_class(&selinux_ss.policy_rwlock,
&selinux_ss_class_key);
 	mutex_init(&selinux_ss.status_lock);
+	lockdep_set_class(&selinux_ss.status_lock,
&selinux_status_class_key);
 	*ss = &selinux_ss;
 }

Pardon my ignorance, but can you explain why we need an explicit call
to lockdep_set_class() here?  I see it used for e.g. the inode
i_lock,
but there the class is per-file_system_type.  It doesn't seem to be
always be used for all locks when they are dynamically initialized or
allocated, e.g. get_empty_filp does not call lockdep_set_class() for
struct file's f_owner.lock or f_lock even though they are dynamically
allocated and initialized.  What makes this case different?

Also, your explanation in the patch description was because the locks
are moved to dynamic allocation.  That was true of the original selinux
namespace patch.  But it isn't true for the wrap global selinux state
patch; selinux_ss is statically allocated and there is only one
instance of it in this patch.  So do we need this lockdep annotation
yet?

I think you are right. I dont get any warnings whey trying to use them, and lockdep
get a useful name for them.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html