From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667E5C433DF for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4173620772 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:27:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="Ydbcyukd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726215AbgGHW1X (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:27:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39528 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726044AbgGHW1W (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:27:22 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x641.google.com (mail-ej1-x641.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::641]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37D63C061A0B for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x641.google.com with SMTP id l12so120233ejn.10 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 15:27:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=M3CJ5AkQEOPgCtVjox2BEo7zZTUcB1g6AUdNDrislks=; b=YdbcyukdBt0/BihY6qrOOsKzKLM9AZEfw5xuty/aYBt7X6PL8SE54b9dcXONpzezJk y0d79RQnmgHSfuI8rPiwOCic4f8K/7WIwT/xtJIrLi3j8hpETiwnb+lahyFMeNesA8bT jbNS4TAaUVz513AcR1+WxJkwCeDPaHjWq0zhvlfOz4Xb+DNCBXiFPwjw4iBPkLQYmv9q N0hdqnTlVVCubRe7p/xOuKGFoiDzVmcWEHt9cj2N0TU+F2eP84ldh2R8BPSBOgZWzZ61 5A3jHADoJx7E2kVfWTH5Q37tEPVPFgA8OV+vMKKUkEZ4ORVFr6uodQjpkLlN4eDlyXCn bKIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M3CJ5AkQEOPgCtVjox2BEo7zZTUcB1g6AUdNDrislks=; b=YcXap19WBiN/++gJ6IERQcWweqssCeG/wu+qYVj0Qc1IRba4sT9evx3mhsOrRma5yX X/E6sbfVfy050E9S/lpdc84kY5kNqXTATrPFeiUt8p4uoR3XDcZ91OjwUyMKlsu2Xlj9 peaFhp3wVk8Kg/qHuJ6DRl+zuk+qfOk3Z8Q9VqyNp0PIHlUt4Lkjy6cwnEx+Lf0hIs/n JGYl/NAsB7xiTj05IZtY0LgU3DhqceHkhPxWd9DT2Olw4K+oSW7tw+75o+RfaWzBwpVh z13r6y5ClV3aOrYAcJjuPqk+JxtQWrSVLm59p1AHhJb1EAuq+L3EITixxrkayekFhLkk 1KDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hhfpkSmTWrhm9gHlWAPXMBpO8KK2ZyTwYAfzWCNMTo6SSl1bS xXpUNA514q/jKl/FTv3eai3ICDTtBXwdhFVHpOxw X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzB+/J71xUafKgkFpZ97jdj5CfyFcTng+kyUSwgIbEmbgV3ILMKYWcFKxMVPcN1xATY3ewRxSUsiyZE1XDyvA0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4757:: with SMTP id j23mr26607711ejs.431.1594247240854; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 15:27:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <159378341669.5956.13490174029711421419.stgit@sifl> <20200703202557.tm6o33uignjpmepa@madcap2.tricolour.ca> In-Reply-To: <20200703202557.tm6o33uignjpmepa@madcap2.tricolour.ca> From: Paul Moore Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:27:09 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: use the proper gfp flags in the audit_log_nfcfg() calls To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, Jones Desougi , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 4:26 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > On 2020-07-03 09:36, Paul Moore wrote: > > Commit 142240398e50 ("audit: add gfp parameter to audit_log_nfcfg") > > incorrectly passed gfp flags to audit_log_nfcfg() which were not > > consistent with the calling function, this commit fixes that. > > > > Fixes: 142240398e50 ("audit: add gfp parameter to audit_log_nfcfg") > > Reported-by: Jones Desougi > > Signed-off-by: Paul Moore > > Looks good to me. For what it's worth: Thanks, applied to audit/next. Also, for the record, reviews are always welcome; I really dislike merging my own patches without reviews. Sometimes it needs to be done to fix a serious fault, build error, etc. but in general I'm of the opinion that maintainer patches should be treated just the same as any other patch. > Reviewed-by: Richard Guy Briggs -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B281EC433DF for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:34:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01B7520772 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:34:25 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 01B7520772 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=paul-moore.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-467-6Fe8wmLRMGWIrEnI9oMmAw-1; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 18:34:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 6Fe8wmLRMGWIrEnI9oMmAw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14AA91902EA0; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:34:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAA7B7F8A4; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:34:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5E61809547; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:34:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 068MRTmQ016534 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:27:29 -0400 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 58D291102E0C; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast03.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.19]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC3BB1104E6E for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD4D8EF3A1 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 22:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ej1-f67.google.com (mail-ej1-f67.google.com [209.85.218.67]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-382-uAHnpYRLPe27SLXaA9IAMw-1; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 18:27:22 -0400 X-MC-Unique: uAHnpYRLPe27SLXaA9IAMw-1 Received: by mail-ej1-f67.google.com with SMTP id dp18so129107ejc.8 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 15:27:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M3CJ5AkQEOPgCtVjox2BEo7zZTUcB1g6AUdNDrislks=; b=hjAs0MqhJYGcHj/iGiROu0QCMFxFfrlY2c2P4ZlzezhnqIQvZaoMpThANxG8lDL06y gDJolU0gfLmuqEfAviPQWZHC6godfJeVKSu2sE9MhL5S5XPDICnPMFTkUuMo08ARKBQG 56v++CqhD561Pg1sRYixrRvtzOaLgefzJ3uCkWSnqVlNOLYSkvR9LImjp+AfXu6e0c2Y OTyEzm5wE5ES+v6b++7jdyFq3G0eHXDvcmpH8TQXlTIMhiKUEUV13oyi8mCJNlc+iGOW 5gdtLCu8zsYUXzE2PvgI11LGeZdvaumR2SN68aj9CD5NgVT39XlTjK8Z38lzcBiEmcbh zJSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/EjaTcwucHI57B6RqDMcX5sjBvjkV36jDrGW3PK1wgw9P2Y5l krQzcC28FsKqfGwGbrfRB3jtwRBHalr8PVlDQKKX X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzB+/J71xUafKgkFpZ97jdj5CfyFcTng+kyUSwgIbEmbgV3ILMKYWcFKxMVPcN1xATY3ewRxSUsiyZE1XDyvA0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4757:: with SMTP id j23mr26607711ejs.431.1594247240854; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 15:27:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <159378341669.5956.13490174029711421419.stgit@sifl> <20200703202557.tm6o33uignjpmepa@madcap2.tricolour.ca> In-Reply-To: <20200703202557.tm6o33uignjpmepa@madcap2.tricolour.ca> From: Paul Moore Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:27:09 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: use the proper gfp flags in the audit_log_nfcfg() calls To: Richard Guy Briggs X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.3 X-loop: linux-audit@redhat.com Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Jones Desougi X-BeenThere: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Linux Audit Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 4:26 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > > On 2020-07-03 09:36, Paul Moore wrote: > > Commit 142240398e50 ("audit: add gfp parameter to audit_log_nfcfg") > > incorrectly passed gfp flags to audit_log_nfcfg() which were not > > consistent with the calling function, this commit fixes that. > > > > Fixes: 142240398e50 ("audit: add gfp parameter to audit_log_nfcfg") > > Reported-by: Jones Desougi > > Signed-off-by: Paul Moore > > Looks good to me. For what it's worth: Thanks, applied to audit/next. Also, for the record, reviews are always welcome; I really dislike merging my own patches without reviews. Sometimes it needs to be done to fix a serious fault, build error, etc. but in general I'm of the opinion that maintainer patches should be treated just the same as any other patch. > Reviewed-by: Richard Guy Briggs -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit