Re: [PATCH ALT4 V2 1/2] audit: show fstype:pathname for entries with anonymous parents

From: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ALT4 V2 1/2] audit: show fstype:pathname for entries with anonymous parents
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 09:07:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170630130735.GA17720@madcap2.tricolour.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170629195817.4ea4906e@gandalf.local.home>

On 2017-06-29 19:58, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:21:22 -0400
> Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Looking at this again today, why would we want to clear name->dentry
> > > in audit_copy_inode() if it is already set?  Does that ever happen?
> > > I'm not sure it does ...  
> > 
> > It has been nearly 3 months since I coded that, so I'll have to dive in
> > and re-analyse what I was thinking at that time.  I think that rationale
> > was that if audit_copy_inode() is called again on that audit_name struct
> > that it could be called by audit_log_link_denied() or __audit_inode()
> > not needing the dentry reference or even by __audit_inode_child() and
> > have it replaced, needing a reference count correction.
> 
> Just a note. If after 3 months you need to re-analyze, you either need
> to design things simpler, or have better comments in the code.

Yep, both occurred to me.  ;-)    Thanks Steve.

> -- Steve

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635