Quoting Nathan Lynch (ntl@xxxxxxxxx): > On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 17:44 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Nathan Lynch (ntl@xxxxxxxxx): > > > On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 13:49 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Nathan Lynch (ntl@xxxxxxxxx): > > > > > On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 19:19 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > > > Can you try the following patch? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, to actually restore the LSM labels you need to add -k to your > > > > > > restart flags, but without the -k you should get a sane default > > > > > > security label. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, the ipc/mq tests pass with this patch and restart -k. Without > > > > > -k the tests still fail in the same manner (msgrcv fails). Is that the > > > > > behavior you'd expect? > > > > > > > > Not really - the test runs as unconfined_u right? > > > > > > I added a ps -Z to test-mq.sh before thawing: > > > > > > # PATH=/root/cr/user-cr.git:$PATH bash test-mq.sh > > > Using output dir ./cr_mq_6T8KIG6 > > > XXX Test 1: simple restart with SYSVIPC msq > > > check-mq: no process killed > > > ../common.sh: line 45: 5173 Killed ( sleep $1; kill -s USR1 $$ ) > > > LABEL PID TTY TIME CMD > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 4358 pts/1 00:00:00 bash > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 5151 pts/1 00:00:00 bash > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 5172 pts/1 00:00:00 nsexec > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 5175 pts/1 00:00:00 sleep > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 5178 pts/1 00:00:00 check- > > > unconfined_u:unconfined_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 5183 pts/1 00:00:00 ps > > > PASS > > > > Can you try the following patch? > > > > (this is on top of the last one - I'd sent) > > > > The problem is that selinux does not assign a label to a msg_msg > > until you do msgsnd. So it may be best to special-case the > > msg_msg object type and always have it restore the msgtype. One > > reason *NOT* to do that woudl be that the restarter might not have > > msg_msg:restore permission... But pls let me know if this patch > > fixes your problem. > > Yes, with both patches applied to ckpt-v19-dev > (261322990a4ed23c8475c232423845f998dd4f89) the tests pass with and > without the -k flag. Cool. The main alternative would be to rip the core of ipc/msg.c:do_msgsnd() out and re-use that in place of the bulk of restore_msg_contents_one(). Since a user can't specify a security context on an msg_msg (but can on msgq) I think the end-result would be fine. It's a lot more work and may cause some other problems, but OTOH we'd be using one code path for msgsnd and its restore which would be a win. thanks, -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
