On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 11:11 +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 04:01:53PM +0200, Cédric Bosdonnat wrote:
> > This code depends on new API in libvirt-gconfig to extract the
> > secmodels handled by the host.
> > ---
> > Diff to v3:
> > * Added yet another missing g_object_unref.
> > * Fixed the logic for supportsSelinux
> > libvirt-sandbox/libvirt-sandbox-builder.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/libvirt-sandbox/libvirt-sandbox-builder.c b/libvirt-sandbox/libvirt-sandbox-builder.c
> > index 48b3acc..d6b5735 100644
> > --- a/libvirt-sandbox/libvirt-sandbox-builder.c
> > +++ b/libvirt-sandbox/libvirt-sandbox-builder.c
> > @@ -322,12 +322,10 @@ static gboolean gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_devices(GVirSandboxBuilder *build
> > return TRUE;
> > }
> >
> > -
> > -static gboolean gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_security(GVirSandboxBuilder *builder G_GNUC_UNUSED,
> > - GVirSandboxConfig *config G_GNUC_UNUSED,
> > - const gchar *statedir G_GNUC_UNUSED,
> > - GVirConfigDomain *domain,
> > - GError **error G_GNUC_UNUSED)
> > +static gboolean gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_security_selinux (GVirSandboxBuilder *builder,
> > + GVirSandboxConfig *config,
> > + GVirConfigDomain *domain,
> > + GError **error)
> > {
> > GVirConfigDomainSeclabel *sec = gvir_config_domain_seclabel_new();
> > const char *label = gvir_sandbox_config_get_security_label(config);
> > @@ -360,6 +358,45 @@ static gboolean gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_security(GVirSandboxBuilder *buil
> > return TRUE;
>
>
> > }
> >
> > +static gboolean gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_security(GVirSandboxBuilder *builder,
> > + GVirSandboxConfig *config,
> > + const gchar *statedir G_GNUC_UNUSED,
> > + GVirConfigDomain *domain,
> > + GError **error)
> > +{
> > + GVirConnection *connection = gvir_sandbox_builder_get_connection(builder);
> > + GVirConfigCapabilities *configCapabilities;
> > + GVirConfigCapabilitiesHost *hostCapabilities;
> > + GList *secmodels, *iter;
> > + gboolean supportsSelinux = FALSE;
> > +
> > + /* What security models are available on the host? */
> > + if (!(configCapabilities = gvir_connection_get_capabilities(connection, error))) {
>
> Missing g_object_unref(connection); here too.
Oops, I forgot that one case indeed.
> > + return FALSE;
> > + }
> > +
> > + hostCapabilities = gvir_config_capabilities_get_host(configCapabilities);
> > +
> > + secmodels = gvir_config_capabilities_host_get_secmodels(hostCapabilities);
> > + for (iter = secmodels; iter != NULL; iter = iter->next) {
> > + if (g_str_equal(gvir_config_capabilities_host_secmodel_get_model(
> > + GVIR_CONFIG_CAPABILITIES_HOST_SECMODEL(iter->data)), "selinux"))
> > + supportsSelinux = TRUE;
> > + g_object_unref(iter->data);
> > + }
> > +
> > + g_list_free(secmodels);
> > + g_object_unref(hostCapabilities);
> > + g_object_unref(configCapabilities);
> > + g_object_unref(connection);
> > +
> > + if (supportsSelinux)
> > + return gvir_sandbox_builder_construct_security_selinux(builder, config,
> > + domain, error);
> > +
> > + return TRUE;
>
> Wondering whether this we should return FALSE when we did nothing
> because we only support SELinux.
No idea what the original intent was... but we shouldn't fail if we just
not using any security label: that may be a valid use case.
> Patch is fine otherwise, I can squash these changes in before pushing if
> you don't want to send yet another iteration ;)
Well, that would save a few mails to the mailing list ;)
--
Cedric
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list