12:13 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11/21/2012 12:57 PM, Anamitra Dutta Majumdar (anmajumd) wrote:
Dan,
Thanks for your response.
Why would semanage perform a recompile of the policies. Is it possible to
enforce semanage not to recompile the policies in order to prevent the
spike.
Thanks, Anamitra
On 11/21/12 2:13 AM, "Daniel J Walsh" <dwalsh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 11/20/2012 06:02 PM, Anamitra Dutta Majumdar (anmajumd) wrote:
>>>
>>> We are in the process of upgrading our product to RHEL6 os. And
>>> during setting of SELinux contexts using semanage commands we see 100
>>> % CPU usage as below
>>>
>>> top - 19:22:33 up 1:00, 1 user, load average: 1.25, 1.15, 1.58
>>> Tasks: 171 total, 2 running, 169 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
>>> Cpu(s): 24.7%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 75.2%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi,
>>> 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 6113004k total, 5841096k used, 271908k free,
>>> 22600k buffers Swap: 2047992k total, 0k used, 2047992k free,
>>> 5078044k cached
>>>
>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
>>>
>>>
>>> 4189 root 20 0 575m 410m 3296 R 100.0 6.9 0:08.17
>>> semanage
>>>
>>>
>>> 21 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.48 events/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 60 root 39 19 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.41 khugepaged
>>>
>>>
>>> 3337 root 20 0 15088 1396 1020 R 0.3 0.0 0:01.29 top
>>>
>>>
>>> 11471 root 39 19 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:14.53 kipmi0
>>>
>>>
>>> 1 root 20 0 19396 1532 1208 S 0.0 0.0 0:01.10 init.real
>>>
>>>
>>> 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd
>>>
>>>
>>> 3 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.03 migration/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 4 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 5 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 6 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 7 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.09 migration/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 8 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 9 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.04 ksoftirqd/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 10 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 11 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.04
>>> migration/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 12 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> migration/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 13 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> ksoftirqd/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 14 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 15 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.05
>>> migration/3
>>>
>>>
>>> 16 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> migration/3
>>>
>>>
>>> 17 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> ksoftirqd/3
>>>
>>>
>>> 18 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/3
>>>
>>>
>>> 19 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 events/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 20 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.03 events/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 22 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.89 events/3
>>>
>>>
>>> 23 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 cpuset
>>>
>>>
>>> 24 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper
>>>
>>>
>>> 25 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 netns
>>>
>>>
>>> 26 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 async/mgr
>>>
>>>
>>> 27 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 pm
>>>
>>>
>>> 28 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.02
>>> sync_supers
>>>
>>>
>>> 29 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.01
>>> bdi-default
>>>
>>>
>>> 30 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> kintegrityd/0
>>>
>>>
>>> 31 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> kintegrityd/1
>>>
>>>
>>> 32 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> kintegrityd/2
>>>
>>>
>>> 33 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00
>>> kintegrityd/3
>>>
>>>
>>> You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/root [root@vos-cm144 ~]# ps -efZ
>>> | grep semanage system_u:system_r:initrc_t:s0 root 4189 4188
>>> 96 19:22 ? 00:00:12 /usr/bin/python -Es /usr/sbin/semanage user -a -P
>>> user -R sysadm_r system_r specialuser_u
>>>
>>> Is this an expected behavior .
>>>
>>> Thanks, Anamitra
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- selinux mailing list selinux(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
>>>
semanage is performing a recompile of policy which is causing the spike.
-- selinux mailing list selinux(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
I am not sure why it is compiling the policy when it adds a file context, it
should be loading the policy to verify that a type exists, but that is all.
Please open a bugzilla on this.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlCtGdwACgkQrlYvE4MpobPJwgCgyTmhzZJeUZjukHJ4HiDzyK28
r94AoKtdnFA88ASjgXDuu4LnDyP3AtzS
=hMNU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----