[PATCH v2 1/2] selinux: Swap two blocks handling setfilecon_raw() failure

[Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>]

In virSecuritySELinuxSetFileconImpl() we have code that handles
setfilecon_raw() failure. The code consists of two blocks: one
for dealing with shared filesystem like NFS (errno is ENOTSUP or
EROFS) and the other block that's dealing with EPERM for
privileged daemon. Well, the order of these two blocks is a bit
confusing because the comment above them mentions the NFS case
but EPERM block follows. Swap these two blocks to make it less
confusing.

Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 src/security/security_selinux.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/security/security_selinux.c b/src/security/security_selinux.c
index 4d4a1705e6..e9c4051a98 100644
--- a/src/security/security_selinux.c
+++ b/src/security/security_selinux.c
@@ -1261,22 +1261,9 @@ virSecuritySELinuxSetFileconImpl(const char *path,
          * boolean tunables to allow it ...
          */
         VIR_WARNINGS_NO_WLOGICALOP_EQUAL_EXPR
-        if (setfilecon_errno != EOPNOTSUPP && setfilecon_errno != ENOTSUP &&
-            setfilecon_errno != EROFS) {
+        if (setfilecon_errno == EOPNOTSUPP || setfilecon_errno == ENOTSUP ||
+            setfilecon_errno == EROFS) {
         VIR_WARNINGS_RESET
-            /* However, don't claim error if SELinux is in Enforcing mode and
-             * we are running as unprivileged user and we really did see EPERM.
-             * Otherwise we want to return error if SELinux is Enforcing. */
-            if (security_getenforce() == 1 &&
-                (setfilecon_errno != EPERM || privileged)) {
-                virReportSystemError(setfilecon_errno,
-                                     _("unable to set security context '%s' on '%s'"),
-                                     tcon, path);
-                return -1;
-            }
-            VIR_WARN("unable to set security context '%s' on '%s' (errno %d)",
-                     tcon, path, setfilecon_errno);
-        } else {
             const char *msg;
             if (virFileIsSharedFSType(path, VIR_FILE_SHFS_NFS) == 1 &&
                 security_get_boolean_active("virt_use_nfs") != 1) {
@@ -1290,6 +1277,19 @@ virSecuritySELinuxSetFileconImpl(const char *path,
                 VIR_INFO("Setting security context '%s' on '%s' not supported",
                          tcon, path);
             }
+        } else {
+            /* However, don't claim error if SELinux is in Enforcing mode and
+             * we are running as unprivileged user and we really did see EPERM.
+             * Otherwise we want to return error if SELinux is Enforcing. */
+            if (security_getenforce() == 1 &&
+                (setfilecon_errno != EPERM || privileged)) {
+                virReportSystemError(setfilecon_errno,
+                                     _("unable to set security context '%s' on '%s'"),
+                                     tcon, path);
+                return -1;
+            }
+            VIR_WARN("unable to set security context '%s' on '%s' (errno %d)",
+                     tcon, path, setfilecon_errno);
         }
 
         return 1;
-- 
2.39.1