From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752103AbcFJAT5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 20:19:57 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53537 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751473AbcFJATz (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jun 2016 20:19:55 -0400 From: Steve Grubb To: Richard Guy Briggs Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, Arnd Bergmann , y2038@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Deepa Dinamani Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/21] audit: Use timespec64 to represent audit timestamps Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 20:19:53 -0400 Message-ID: <1850599.zs4hA4SSlr@x2> Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.6-200.fc23.x86_64; KDE/4.14.20; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20160609235943.GL18488@madcap2.tricolour.ca> References: <1465448705-25055-1-git-send-email-deepa.kernel@gmail.com> <15760445.1IAucOxmWy@x2> <20160609235943.GL18488@madcap2.tricolour.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.25]); Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:19:55 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, June 09, 2016 07:59:43 PM Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 16/06/09, Steve Grubb wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 08, 2016 10:05:01 PM Deepa Dinamani wrote: > > > struct timespec is not y2038 safe. > > > Audit timestamps are recorded in string format into > > > an audit buffer for a given context. > > > These mark the entry timestamps for the syscalls. > > > Use y2038 safe struct timespec64 to represent the times. > > > The log strings can handle this transition as strings can > > > hold upto 1024 characters. > > > > Have you tested this with ausearch or any audit utilities? As an aside, a > > time stamp that is up to 1024 characters long is terribly wasteful > > considering how many events we get. > > Steve, > > I don't expect the size of the time stamp text to change since the > format isn't being changed and I don't expect the date stamp text length > to change until Y10K, but you never know what will happen in 8 > millenia... (Who knows, maybe that damn Linux server in my basement > will still be running then...) > > Isn't the maximum message length MAX_AUDIT_MESSAGE_LENGTH (8970 octets)? Bytes, yes. But I was thinking that if its going to get big we should consider switching from a base 10 representation to base 16. That would give us back a few bytes. We discuss this on the linux-audit list rather than the main list. -Steve