mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	zohar@linux.ibm.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
	mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com,
	sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] IMA: Call workqueue functions to measure queued keys
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 18:44:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <edda07dc-c615-58f1-5689-4692c3fb3315@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1576634499.14900.10.camel@HansenPartnership.com>

On 12/17/2019 6:01 PM, James Bottomley wrote:

> 
> This code is confusing me:
> 
> +       /*
> +        * To avoid holding the mutex when processing queued keys,
> +        * transfer the queued keys with the mutex held to a temp list,
> +        * release the mutex, and then process the queued keys from
> +        * the temp list.
> +        *
> +        * Since ima_process_keys is set to true, any new key will be
> +        * processed immediately and not be queued.
> +        */
> +       INIT_LIST_HEAD(&temp_ima_keys);
> +
> +       mutex_lock(&ima_keys_mutex);
> +
> +       if (!ima_process_keys) {
> +               ima_process_keys = true;
> +
> +               if (!list_empty(&ima_keys)) {
> +                       list_for_each_entry_safe(entry, tmp, &ima_keys, list)
> +                               list_move_tail(&entry->list, &temp_ima_keys);
> +                       process = true;
> +               }
> +       }
> +
> +       mutex_unlock(&ima_keys_mutex);
> +
> 
> The direct implication of the comment and the lock dance with the
> temporary list and the processed flag is that stuff can be added to the
> ima_keys list after you drop the mutex.  Your explanation in the prior
> couple of emails says that nothing can be added because the
> ima_process_keys flag setting prevents it.  If the latter is true, you
> can simply drop the lock after setting the flag and rely on ima_keys
> not changing to run it through process_buffer_measurement without
> needing any of the intermediate list or the processed flag.  If the
> latter isn't true then any key added to ima_keys after the mutex is
> dropped is never processed.
> 
> James

Once the flag is set no new key will be added to ima_keys list.

You are right - if the flag is set with the lock taken, then there is no 
need for the temp list. After dropping the lock, measurement can be done 
directly from ima_keys list.

Thanks for reviewing the code. I'll send an update tomorrow.

  -lakshmi

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-18  2:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-13 17:18 [PATCH v4 0/2] IMA: Deferred measurement of keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 17:18 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] IMA: Define workqueue for early boot "key" measurements Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-16 12:30   ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-16 23:44     ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-17 10:54       ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-13 17:18 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] IMA: Call workqueue functions to measure queued keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-13 17:25   ` James Bottomley
2019-12-13 17:31     ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-15 15:22       ` James Bottomley
2019-12-16  1:12         ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-16  6:53           ` James Bottomley
2019-12-16 13:05             ` Mimi Zohar
2019-12-16 19:20             ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-16 21:17               ` James Bottomley
2019-12-16 21:37                 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-16 21:52                   ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-17 22:22                     ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-18  2:01                       ` James Bottomley
2019-12-18  2:44                         ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian [this message]
2019-12-18  3:00                           ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-12-18  3:24                             ` James Bottomley

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=edda07dc-c615-58f1-5689-4692c3fb3315@linux.microsoft.com \
    --to=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
    --cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=matthewgarrett@google.com \
    --cc=sashal@kernel.org \
    --cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome