| Summary: | /dev/bsr4096_* are labelled system_u:object_r:device_t:s0 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Milos Malik <mmalik> |
| Component: | selinux-policy | Assignee: | Miroslav Grepl <mgrepl> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Milos Malik <mmalik> |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 6.2 | CC: | dwalsh, eparis |
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | ppc64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | selinux-policy-3.7.19-119.el6 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2011-12-06 10:19:44 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Milos Malik
2011-10-10 15:14:15 UTC
Eric, any idea how we should label it? What kind of device is it? Google returns nothing. my best guess is: IBM POWER Barrier Synchronization Register Milos, Sure but have no idea what the proper label should be. cpu_device_t may be as close as we have unless we want to add a new device type. Milos, could you just label it using chcon and leave this label for a while during your testing. I am fine with cpu_device_t. Fixed in selinux-policy-3_7_19-117_el6 /dev/bsr.* -c gen_context(system_u:object_r:cpu_device_t,s0) Is in F16/Rawhide. Fixed in selinux-policy-3.7.19-119.el6 Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1511.html |