Re: [Linux-ima-user] IMA hash update

[Patrick O. <pat...@in...>]

On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 13:34 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> 
> On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 12:32 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 15:41 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2016-02-18 at 07:32 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > If anyone has suggestions for debugging the long delay until data gets
> > > flushed, then I am open for suggestions. I'm still seeing that even with
> > > "data=journal", it's only that the effect is less drastic.
> > 
> > Currently, S_SYNC isn't set.  Setting it looks like it would resolve the
> > problem.
> > fs/ext4/xattr.c:
> >                 if (IS_SYNC(inode))
> >                         ext4_handle_sync(handle);
> 
> Changing  'if (IS_SYNC(inode))" to  "if (IS_SYNC(inode)  ||
> IS_IMA(inode))" in both places should fix the problem.

What is the expected effect of this change?

I've added the change to my kernel. When running with data=ordered and
cutting power a few seconds after writing /etc/machine-id without
fsync(), I still get an empty file with a security.ima for the non-empty
file.

I also tried with a wait time of 10 seconds (i.e. more than the default
five second commit delay), but still no luck.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.