On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Casey Schaufler
<ca...@schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
>
> Now I'll put on my Smack maintainer hat. Performance improvement is
> always welcome, but I would rather see attention to performance of
> the LSM architecture than SELinux specific hacks.
I haven't seen huge issues with performance at that level.
> The LSM blob
> pointer scheme is there so that you (Linus) don't have to see the
> dreadful things that we security people are doing. Is it time to
> get past that level of disassociation? Or, and I really hate asking
> this, have you fallen into the SELinux camp?
I only have selinux performance to look at, since I run Fedora. I used
to actually turn it off entirely, because it impacted VFS performance
so horribly. We fixed it. I (and Al) spent time to make sure that we
don't need to drop RCU lookup just because we call into the security
layers etc.
But I haven't even looked at what non-selinux setups do to
performance. Last time I tried Ubuntu (they still use apparmor, no?),
"make modules_install ; make install" didn't work for the kernel, and
if the Ubuntu people don't want to support kernel engineers, I
certainly am not going to bother with them. Who uses smack?
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
