Re: [PATCH RFC] netlabel: remove unused param from audit_log_format()

From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] netlabel: remove unused param from audit_log_format()
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:10:32 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhRtTykJVze_93ed+n+v14Ai9J5Mbre9nGEc2rkqbqKc_g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200827172006.gudui4alfbbf2a2p@medion>

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 1:20 PM Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 06:06:34PM +0100, Alex Dewar wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 01:00:58PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:39 PM Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Commit d3b990b7f327 ("netlabel: fix problems with mapping removal")
> > > > added a check to return an error if ret_val != 0, before ret_val is
> > > > later used in a log message. Now it will unconditionally print "...
> > > > res=0". So don't print res anymore.
> > > >
> > > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Dead code")
> > > > Fixes: d3b990b7f327 ("netlabel: fix problems with mapping removal")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > I wasn't sure whether it was intended that something other than ret_val
> > > > be printed in the log, so that's why I'm sending this as an RFC.
> > >
> > > It's intentional for a couple of reasons:
> > >
> > > * The people who care about audit logs like to see success/fail (e.g.
> > > "res=X") for audit events/records, so printing this out gives them the
> > > warm fuzzies.
> > >
> > > * For a lot of awful reasons that I won't bore you with, we really
> > > don't want to add/remove fields in the middle of an audit record so we
> > > pretty much need to keep the "res=0" there even if it seems a bit
> > > redundant.
> > >
> > > So NACK from me, but thanks for paying attention just the same :)
> >
> > Would you rather just have an explicit "res=0" in there, without looking
> > at ret_val? The thing is that ret_val will *always* be zero at this point in
> > the code, because, if not, the function will already have returned.
> > That's why Coverity flagged it up as a redundant check.
>
> Sorry, I meant "res=1". The code will always print res=1, because
> ret_val is always 0.

That's okay, I can't tell you how many times I've made that mistake
with "res=" :)

Anyway, yes at that point ret_val should always be 0, and "res=X"
should always be "res=1", so if you wanted to change it to a fixed
value so you could get rid of the ternary statement that would be
okay.

> > > >  net/netlabel/netlabel_domainhash.c | 5 ++---
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/net/netlabel/netlabel_domainhash.c b/net/netlabel/netlabel_domainhash.c
> > > > index f73a8382c275..526762b2f3a9 100644
> > > > --- a/net/netlabel/netlabel_domainhash.c
> > > > +++ b/net/netlabel/netlabel_domainhash.c
> > > > @@ -612,9 +612,8 @@ int netlbl_domhsh_remove_entry(struct netlbl_dom_map *entry,
> > > >         audit_buf = netlbl_audit_start_common(AUDIT_MAC_MAP_DEL, audit_info);
> > > >         if (audit_buf != NULL) {
> > > >                 audit_log_format(audit_buf,
> > > > -                                " nlbl_domain=%s res=%u",
> > > > -                                entry->domain ? entry->domain : "(default)",
> > > > -                                ret_val == 0 ? 1 : 0);
> > > > +                                " nlbl_domain=%s",
> > > > +                                entry->domain ? entry->domain : "(default)");
> > > >                 audit_log_end(audit_buf);
> > > >         }
> > > >

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com