Excerpts from Stephen Smalley's message of 2011-04-28 13:23:59 -0400: > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 13:13 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:03 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > On 4/28/2011 6:30 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 20:15 -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > > >> I have been tracking down an problem that we've been seeing > > > >> with Smack on top of btrfs and have narrowed it down to a check > > > >> in smack_d_instantiate() that checks to see if the underlying > > > >> filesystem supports extended attributes by looking at > > > >> > > > >> inode->i_op->getxattr > > > >> > > > >> If the filesystem has no entry for getxattr it is assumed that > > > >> it does not support extended attributes. The Smack code clearly > > > >> finds this value to be NULL for btrfs and uses a fallback value. > > > >> Clearly something is amiss, as other code paths clearly find the > > > >> i_op->getxattr function and use it to effect. The btrfs code > > > >> quite obviously includes getxattr functions. > > > >> > > > >> So, what is btrfs up to such that the inode ops does not include > > > >> getxattr when security_d_instantiate is called? I am led to > > > >> understand that SELinux has worked around this, but looking at > > > >> the SELinux code I expect that there is a problem there as well. > > > >> > > > >> Thank you. > > > > kernel version(s)? > > > > > > 2.6.37 > > > 2.6.39rc4 > > > > > > > reproducer? > > > > > > The MeeGo team saw the behavior first. I have been instrumenting > > > the Smack code to track down what is happening. I am in the process > > > of developing a Smack workaround for the btrfs behavior. > > > > If this is for newly created files, then we initialize the in-core > > security label for the inode as part of the inode_init_security hook in > > SELinux and thus don't even try to call ->getxattr at d_instantiate > > time. Not sure though why it wouldn't already be set. > > Actually, a quick look at the code makes it clear. btrfs_create() and > friends call d_instantiate() before setting inode->i_op() for new > inodes. In contrast, ext[234] set the i_op before calling > d_instantiate(). > > In any event, you don't really need to go through the slow path of > calling ->getxattr for new inodes as you already know the label that is > being set. >
There's no reason we can't set i_op sooner in btrfs, I'll patch this in. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
