Daniel J Walsh wrote:
> Joshua Brindle wrote:
>> Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>>> Updated patch. Comments inlined.
>>>
>>> Stephen Smalley wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 15:46 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
>>>> Patch speeds up semanage command from 17-20 seconds to 3-4 seconds.
>>>>
>>> plain text document attachment (libsemanage-rhat.patch)
>>> diff --exclude-from=exclude -N -u -r nsalibsemanage/src/direct_api.c
>>> libsemanage-2.0.27/src/direct_api.c
>>> --- nsalibsemanage/src/direct_api.c 2008-06-12 23:25:16.000000000 -0400
>>> +++ libsemanage-2.0.27/src/direct_api.c 2008-08-14 11:51:15.000000000 -0400
>>> @@ -489,12 +489,6 @@
>>> modified |= ifaces->dtable->is_modified(ifaces->dbase);
>>> modified |= nodes->dtable->is_modified(nodes->dbase);
>>>
>>> - /* FIXME: get rid of these, once we support loading the existing policy,
>>> - * instead of rebuilding it */
>>> - modified |= seusers_modified;
>>> - modified |= fcontexts_modified;
>>> - modified |= users_extra_modified;
>>> -
>>> /* If there were policy changes, or explicitly requested, rebuild the
>>> policy */
>>> if (sh->do_rebuild || modified) {
>>>
>>> @@ -667,11 +661,34 @@
>>> retval = semanage_verify_kernel(sh);
>>> if (retval < 0)
>>> goto cleanup;
>>> - }
>>> + } else {
>>> + sepol_policydb_create(&out);
>>>
>>>> We should test for failure here (out of memory condition possible).
>>> Ok I will modify
>>>
>>>
>>> + modified |= seusers_modified;
>>> + modified |= fcontexts_modified;
>>> + modified |= users_extra_modified;
>>>
>>>> Should we be setting modified here or just testing for these other
>>>> _modified flags where needed?
>>> Ditto
>>> +
>>> + retval = semanage_read_policydb(sh, out);
>>>
>>>> Are there any other situations where we can re-use the existing kernel
>>>> policy like this? e.g. Do we really need to re-link/expand the modules
>>>> if we aren't actually modifying modules? Although there I suppose we
>>>> might want a copy of the policy before merging local customizations.
>>> Maybe although you would need someone who understands the library better
>>> then I do.
>>>
>>>> Also reminds me of the whole question of why we don't do incremental
>>>> linking to avoid having to re-link each time.
>>> That sounds good to me.
>>> + if (retval < 0)
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> +
>>> + dbase_policydb_attach((dbase_policydb_t *) pusers_base->dbase,out);
>>> + dbase_policydb_attach((dbase_policydb_t *) pports->dbase, out);
>>> + dbase_policydb_attach((dbase_policydb_t *) pifaces->dbase, out);
>>> + dbase_policydb_attach((dbase_policydb_t *) pbools->dbase, out);
>>> + dbase_policydb_attach((dbase_policydb_t *) pnodes->dbase, out);
>>>
>>>> Ivan suggested these shouldn't be necessary as long as you make the
>>>> later detach conditional. But he also raised a concern about merging
>>>> with the base seusers or users_extra from the modules?
>>> Removed and only detach if modified is set.
>>>
>>> - /* FIXME: else if !modified, but seusers_modified,
>>> - * load the existing policy instead of rebuilding */
>>> + if (seusers_modified) {
>>> + retval = pseusers->dtable->clear(sh, pseusers->dbase);
>>> + if (retval < 0)
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>>
>>>> I'm a little unclear on what this is doing - can you clarify?
>>> This is clearing the existing seusers.final file, otherwise delete was
>>> not working.
>>>
>>>
>>> + }
>>>
>>> + retval = semanage_base_merge_components(sh);
>>> + if (retval < 0)
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> +
>>> + /* Seusers */
>>> + }
>>> /* ======= Post-process: Validate non-policydb components ===== */
>>>
>>> /* Validate local modifications to file contexts.
>>> diff --exclude-from=exclude -N -u -r nsalibsemanage/src/semanage_store.c
>>> libsemanage-2.0.27/src/semanage_store.c
>>> --- nsalibsemanage/src/semanage_store.c 2008-06-12 23:25:16.000000000 -0400
>>> +++ libsemanage-2.0.27/src/semanage_store.c 2008-08-08
>>> 15:23:20.000000000 -0400
>>> @@ -1648,6 +1648,47 @@
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> + * Read the policy from the sandbox (kernel)
>>> + */
>>> +int semanage_read_policydb(semanage_handle_t * sh, sepol_policydb_t * in)
>>> +{
>>> +
>>> + int retval = STATUS_ERR;
>>> + const char *kernel_filename = NULL;
>>> + struct sepol_policy_file *pf = NULL;
>>> + FILE *infile = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + if ((kernel_filename =
>>> + semanage_path(SEMANAGE_ACTIVE, SEMANAGE_KERNEL)) == NULL) {
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> + }
>>> + if ((infile = fopen(kernel_filename, "r")) == NULL) {
>>> + ERR(sh, "Could not open kernel policy %s for reading.",
>>> + kernel_filename);
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> + }
>>> + __fsetlocking(infile, FSETLOCKING_BYCALLER);
>>> + if (sepol_policy_file_create(&pf)) {
>>> + ERR(sh, "Out of memory!");
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> + }
>>> + sepol_policy_file_set_fp(pf, infile);
>>> + sepol_policy_file_set_handle(pf, sh->sepolh);
>>> + if (sepol_policydb_read(in, pf) == -1) {
>>> + ERR(sh, "Error while reading kernel policy from %s.",
>>> + kernel_filename);
>>> + goto cleanup;
>>> + }
>>> + retval = STATUS_SUCCESS;
>>> +
>>> + cleanup:
>>> + if (infile != NULL) {
>>> + fclose(infile);
>>> + }
>>> + sepol_policy_file_free(pf);
>>> + return retval;
>>> +}
>>> +/**
>>> * Writes the final policy to the sandbox (kernel)
>>> */
>>> int semanage_write_policydb(semanage_handle_t * sh, sepol_policydb_t * out)
>>> diff --exclude-from=exclude -N -u -r nsalibsemanage/src/semanage_store.h
>>> libsemanage-2.0.27/src/semanage_store.h
>>> --- nsalibsemanage/src/semanage_store.h 2008-06-12 23:25:16.000000000 -0400
>>> +++ libsemanage-2.0.27/src/semanage_store.h 2008-08-11
>>> 09:05:16.000000000 -0400
>>> @@ -97,6 +97,9 @@
>>> sepol_module_package_t * base,
>>> sepol_policydb_t ** policydb);
>>>
>>> +int semanage_read_policydb(semanage_handle_t * sh,
>>> + sepol_policydb_t * policydb);
>>> +
>>> int semanage_write_policydb(semanage_handle_t * sh,
>>> sepol_policydb_t * policydb);
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> diff --exclude-from=exclude -N -u -r nsalibsemanage/src/genhomedircon.c libsemanage-2.0.27/src/genhomedircon.c
>>> --- nsalibsemanage/src/genhomedircon.c 2008-08-05 09:57:28.000000000 -0400
>>> +++ libsemanage-2.0.27/src/genhomedircon.c 2008-08-26 10:30:30.000000000 -0400
>>> @@ -487,7 +487,6 @@
>>> const char *role_prefix)
>>> {
>>> replacement_pair_t repl[] = {
>>> - {.search_for = TEMPLATE_SEUSER,.replace_with = seuser},
>>> {.search_for = TEMPLATE_HOME_DIR,.replace_with = home},
>>> {.search_for = TEMPLATE_ROLE,.replace_with = role_prefix},
>>> {NULL, NULL}
>>> @@ -547,7 +546,6 @@
>>> replacement_pair_t repl[] = {
>>> {.search_for = TEMPLATE_USER,.replace_with = user},
>>> {.search_for = TEMPLATE_ROLE,.replace_with = role_prefix},
>>> - {.search_for = TEMPLATE_SEUSER,.replace_with = seuser},
>>> {NULL, NULL}
>>> };
>>> Ustr *line = USTR_NULL;
>> I was with you up until this, why remove seuser from genhomedircon?
What about this?
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
