On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Define a selinux state structure (struct selinux_state) for > global SELinux state and pass it explicitly to all security server > functions. The public portion of the structure contains state > that is used throughout the SELinux code, such as the enforcing mode. > The structure also contains a pointer to a selinux_ss structure whose > definition is private to the security server and contains security > server specific state such as the policy database and SID table. > > This change should have no effect on SELinux behavior or APIs > (userspace or LSM). It merely wraps SELinux state and passes it > explicitly as needed. > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > This is effectively v2 of "selinux: introduce a selinux namespace", > but rewritten per the review to only perform the encapsulation of state > and rebased onto latest selinux/next, currently v4.16-rc1-based. > Changes from v1: > - Rename selinux_ns to selinux_state, > - Statically allocate selinux_state and selinux_ss, > - Drop any namespace-specific fields, code, and references, > - Use static inlines rather than macros. > > I also intend to rework the "selinux: support multiple selinuxfs instances" > and "selinux: move the AVC into the selinux namespace" patches similarly > and re-base on this one, but want to wait until this one is finalized since > every change to this own will require further reworking of the later ones. Thanks for the respin Stephen, I know that was probably a bit painful given the size of the patch; it definitely wasn't fun to review. For the most part I think everything here looks fine (minor nitpick, see below), and because of these points: 1) Everything here is internal to SELinux so we change it without breaking userspace or even other parts of the kernel. 2) Other work is dependent on this patch. 3) A patch of this size and scopr, I want it in linux-next sooner rather than later. ... I'm going to merge this now, or rather as soon as my test kernel finishes building and I can give this a quick sanity check. As expected, there were some minor merge problems with the SCTP patches, but those were trivially fixed. > diff --git a/security/selinux/include/security.h b/security/selinux/include/security.h > index 02f0412d42f2..c3a1ef10e710 100644 > --- a/security/selinux/include/security.h > +++ b/security/selinux/include/security.h ... > +static inline bool is_enforcing(struct selinux_state *state) > +static inline void set_enforcing(struct selinux_state *state, bool value) More nitpickery: I'm not a fan of these names. I'm going to take partial blame for this as I didn't pay close enough attention to the names earlier, I was focused on the #define vs inline function nature of the functions. I realize it's late, and I want to get this merged (see above), so I'll put together a separate patch on top of this to change the names. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
