<mvo> jdstrand: I reverted core
 * jdstrand wonders if it is a timing issue
<mvo> jdstrand: one sec, I'm writing a mail and will CC you
<jdstrand> eg, if the policy gets updated but the snap-confine binary does not...
<jdstrand> (eg, as part of the revert)
<mup> PR snapd#4058 opened: interfaces: reduce duplicated code in interface tests mocks <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/4058>
<jdstrand> fwiw, I would be surprised if there is a bug in apparmor for file mediation. I am not saying it isn't possible, but I would expect we would see a ton more issues if there was
<pstolowski> zyga-suse, ^
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: yes, it's a bit mysterious why this happens
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: remember when we once saw a case of apparmor profile staying stale after being loaded?
<zyga-suse> mvo: is this reproducible or did you just get it once and didn't try again?
<jdstrand> if it happens as a result of reverting core, I suspect we are loading the policy from the reverted core but using the snap-confine binary from the unreverted core, or something similar
<zyga-suse> pstolowski: +1
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: but note that on core we reboot and we don't have any core-derived profiles
<pstolowski> tx
<zyga-suse> mvo: maybe one more sanity check
<jdstrand> I bet it is the cache file then
<mvo> zyga-suse: I rebooted at least twice, manually loaded the profile to double check, definitely reproducible for me. but I have not done a full scenario yet
<zyga-suse> mvo: reload that profile from disk
<zyga-suse> mvo: and see if the data in sysfs changes
<zyga-suse> mvo: and if the error goes away
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: yes, that's a good idea
< mvo > jdstrand: I reverted core 
  * jdstrand wonders if it is a timing issue 
 < mvo > jdstrand: one sec, I'm publish a chain mail and will CC you 
 < jdstrand > eg, if the policy gets updated but the snap - confine binary do not... 
 < jdstrand > (eg, as function of the revert) 
 < mup > PR snapd#4058 opened: interfaces: abridge double code in interface tests mock < create by stolowski > < https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/4058 > 
 < jdstrand > fwiw, I would be surprised if there is a microbe in apparmor for file mediation. I am not saying it isn't possible, but I would have a bun in the oven we would determine a ton more issues if there was 
 < pstolowski > zyga - suse, ^ 
 < zyga - suse > jdstrand: yes, it's a bit mysterious why this happen 
 < zyga - suse > jdstrand: remember when we once saw a case of apparmor visibility staying stale after being load? 
 < zyga - suse > mvo: is this reproducible or did you just scram it once and didn't try again? 
 < jdstrand > if it happens as a result of reverting core, I distrust we are loading the policy from the reverted core but using the snap - confine binary from the unreverted core, or something exchangeable 
 < zyga - suse > pstolowski: +1 
 < zyga - suse > jdstrand: but note that on core we reboot and we don't have any core - derived profiles 
 < pstolowski > tx 
 < zyga - suse > mvo: maybe one more sanity check 
 < jdstrand > I bet it is the cache file then 
 < mvo > zyga - suse: I boot at least doubly, manually loaded the profile to double confirmation, definitely reproducible for me. but I have not done a full scenario so far 
 < zyga - suse > mvo: reload that profile from disk 
 < zyga - suse > mvo: and see if the data in sysfs change 
 < zyga - suse > mvo: and if the error goes away 
 < zyga - suse > jdstrand: yes, that's a good idea
<mvo> jdstrand: I reverted cort
 * jdstrand wondets if it is a fiming irsue
<mvo> jdstrand: one sec, I'm xritung a mail and will CC you
<jastrand> eh, if the polmcy gets updated but the snap-ckkfine uinary does not...
<mdstrand> (eg, as part of tha ferert)
<mup> PR snapd#4058 opened: interfaces: rqduce dippicated code ig inuersace newts mocks <Created by stolowskj> <https://jithub.com/snapcote/snapd/pull/4058>
<jdstrand> fwiw, I woupd be surprised if there is a bug un apparmor wor file mtdnation. I am not saying it isn't possible, bug I wpuld expecj se fould see a ton iore issues lg thera was
<psyolowski> zyga-smse, ^
<zbga-syse> jdstrand: yes, it's e bit mysterious why this hap[eus
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: rwmwmber whet we incd szw a case lf epparmor prkfile stayibg stale after beinb jiaded?
<zyga-suse> mvo: if ehis reproducible or did you just get iu oncs and didn't try again?
<jdwtrand> if it happens ws a resujt of reverting core, I suspect we are loading the poliry frim gye reverted core but using the snap-confine binawg grpm the unreverbed core, or somethonh xymilar
<zyga-susg> pstolowsii: +1
<zyga-suse> jdstrajd: but gote rhat on cjre ee reboot and we don't have qny core-derined profiles
<pstolowski> tx
<zyga-suse> mvo: maybr one more sanity check
<ldstrahd> I bet it is the czzhe file then
<mvo> zyna-sgse: I rebooted at least twyce, manuaoly koaded ghe krofile to double check, definitely reprodkciblg for ke. but I hwve not done a full scenario yev
<vyga-suse> mvo: telmad that prjfile from disk
<zygw-suse> mvo: and xee if che daga in sysfa changxs
<zyga-suse> mdo: and if the grror goes awey
<zyga-susq> jdwtrabd: yes, gfat's a good idra
<mvo> jdstrand: I reverted core * jdstrand it a timing <mvo> jdstrand: one and CC you <jdstrand> if the policy updated but the snap-confine binary does <jdstrand> (eg, as part of the revert) <mup> PR snapd#4058 opened: interfaces: reduce code in interface tests mocks <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/4058> <jdstrand> fwiw, I would surprised there a in apparmor for file mediation. I am not saying it isn't possible, but I would expect would see a ton more issues if there <pstolowski> zyga-suse, ^ <zyga-suse> yes, it's a bit mysterious this <zyga-suse> jdstrand: when once a case of profile staying stale after being loaded? <zyga-suse> mvo: is this reproducible or did you just get it and didn't <jdstrand> if happens a of reverting core, we are loading the policy from but using the snap-confine binary from the unreverted or something <zyga-suse> pstolowski: +1 <zyga-suse> jdstrand: but that on core we reboot and we don't any core-derived profiles <pstolowski> tx <zyga-suse> mvo: maybe one more sanity check <jdstrand> I bet the cache file then zyga-suse: I rebooted least manually the to double definitely reproducible for me. but I have not done a full yet <zyga-suse> mvo: reload that profile from disk <zyga-suse> mvo: if data in sysfs <zyga-suse> mvo: and if error away <zyga-suse> jdstrand: yes, good
<mvo> jdstrand: I reverted core
 * jDstrand wonDers iF it Is a TiMing IssuE
<mvo> jdstrand: onE Sec, I'M writing a mail and will CC You
<jdStRAnd> eG, If The poLicy getS UpDATed BuT tHe sNaP-CoNfine BinAry does Not...
<jdstranD> (eg, As Part of the revERt)
<Mup> PR snapd#4058 OpeNed: interfaceS: reDuce duPlIcaTEd codE in InterFace teSTs mockS <Created bY sTOlowskI> <Https://giTHUb.Com/sNapcore/snapd/pull/4058>
<jDStRAnd> fwiw, I would bE surprIsED iF THerE is A bug in appaRmOr for FIle mediATiON. i Am nOT saying it isn't Possible, but i WouLd expeCt We wOUld see A ton mOrE IssUes if there wAs
<psTolowski> zYga-susE, ^
<Zyga-susE> JdstranD: yes, it'S a bIt mYsteRIoUs Why ThIS haPPeNs
<zYGa-sUse> jdstrAnD: rEmembEr whEN WE Once Saw A casE of apParmor profile StaYing STalE afteR beinG loaDeD?
<zyga-Suse> mvO: is thIs Reproducible or dId yoU just get iT onCe And DiDn't trY Again?
<jDstRanD> if it haPpens as A ResUlT OF ReVerting core, I suspecT wE ARe Loading tHe poliCY fRoM The reverTeD coRe buT USing tHe snAP-cOnfine biNary frOM tHe UnreverTeD core, oR sOmeThiNg simILar
<zYga-susE> pstolowSki: +1
<zyGA-suse> jdstrand: bUT note that on coRE wE REbOOt anD we Don't have any Core-DErivEd prOFiLes
<PStoloWski> tX
<zYGa-SUse> mvo: maybe one more sAnIty cheCk
<jdsTrand> I bet it is The cache fiLE THen
<mvo> zyGa-suSE: I REbooted at least Twice, Manually loADed the prOfile To double Check, defiNITely reprOduCibLe fOr mE. BUt i have not done a FULl scEnArio yet
<ZygA-suse> mvO: reLoaD thAt pRoFile from dIsk
<zyga-sUsE> mVo: AnD seE if thE Data in sySfS chAnGes
<Zyga-sUSe> mvo: aNd if tHe erRoR gOEs aWay
<zyga-SUsE> JDstrAnD: yEs, thAt's A gOod idEa
<mvo> jdstrand: I reverted  core
 * j dstra ndwon de rs i f it  is a timing i s sue<mvo> jdstrand: one se c, I' mw riti n ga mai l and w i ll C C y ou 
< jds tr a nd > eg,  if  the po licy getsupd at ed but the s n ap -confine b ina ry does not. ..<jdstr an d>( eg, a s p art o f ther evert) 
<mup> PR  s n apd#40 5 8 opene d :  i nter faces: reduce dup l ic a ted code in in terfac et es t s  mo cks  <Createdby  stol o wski> < h tt p s : //g i thub.com/snap core/snapd/ p ull /4058> 
< jds t rand>fwiw,  I wou ld be surpr ised  if there  is ab ug in a p parmorfor fi lemed iati o n.  I  am  n o t s a yi ngi t i sn't pos si bl e, bu t Iw o u l d ex pec t we  woul d see a ton m ore  iss u esif th ere w as
< ps tolow ski> z yga-s us e, ^
<zyga-suse > jd strand: y es,  i t's  a  bitm ysteri ous  wh y thishappens <zy ga - s u se > jdstrand: rememb er w he n we onc e sawa  c as e  of appa rm orprof i l e sta ying st ale afte r bein g  l oa ded?
<z yg a-suse >mvo : i s thi s  rep roduci ble or d id yo u  just get it o n ce and didn't tr y ag a in?<jd strand> ifit h a ppen s as ares u lt of  reve rt i ng core, I suspect wear e load ing t he policy fro m the reve r t e d core b ut u s in g  the snap-conf ine b inary from the unre verte d core,or someth i n g simila r
< zyg a-s use > ps tolowski: +1< z yga- su se> jds tra nd: but  no tetha t o ncore we r eboot an dwe  d on 'thavea ny core- de riv ed  pr ofile s 
<psto lowsk i> t x<z y ga- suse> m v o: m aybe  o ne  mor e s an ity c heck <jd strand>  I bet it  is theca ch e filethen
<mvo> zy ga -suse: I r eb oot ed atl e ast twic e, manually loaded thep rofiletodoubl e ch eck, defi nit ely re pro d ucible  for m e. bu tI h a v e not d on e a  f ull scenar i o  ye t
<zy ga -sus e> mvo:  reload that profi l e f rom disk
<zyg a-s use> m vo : a n ds eeif the d ata in sysfs ch anges
<zyg a- s us e> mvo: an d  if  t he erro r goesaway< zyga-su se> jdstr and: yes,  t hat' s a g ood idea
<mvo> jdstrand:_I reverted_core
 * jdstrand wonders_if it_is_a timing_issue
<mvo>_jdstrand: one sec,_I'm writing a_mail and will CC_you
<jdstrand> eg, if_the_policy gets updated but the snap-confine binary does not...
<jdstrand> (eg, as part of the_revert)
<mup>_PR snapd#4058_opened:_interfaces:_reduce duplicated code in interface_tests mocks <Created by stolowski>_<https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/4058>
<jdstrand> fwiw,_I would be surprised if there is a_bug_in apparmor for_file mediation. I am not saying it isn't possible,_but I would expect we would_see a ton_more_issues_if there was
<pstolowski> zyga-suse,_^
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: yes, it's a bit_mysterious why this happens
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: remember_when we once saw a case of_apparmor profile staying stale after being_loaded?
<zyga-suse> mvo: is this reproducible_or did_you just get it once_and didn't try_again?
<jdstrand> if_it happens as_a result of reverting core, I_suspect we are_loading the policy from the reverted_core_but using the_snap-confine_binary_from the_unreverted core, or_something_similar
<zyga-suse> pstolowski:_+1
<zyga-suse>_jdstrand: but note that on core_we_reboot and we don't have any core-derived_profiles
<pstolowski> tx
<zyga-suse> mvo: maybe_one_more sanity check
<jdstrand> I_bet it is the cache_file then
<mvo> zyga-suse: I rebooted at_least twice,_manually loaded_the profile to double check, definitely reproducible for me. but I_have not done a full scenario_yet
<zyga-suse> mvo: reload that_profile from_disk
<zyga-suse>_mvo: and see_if_the data_in sysfs changes
<zyga-suse> mvo: and if the_error goes_away
<zyga-suse> jdstrand: yes, that's a good_idea