[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081216234927.9cb8a077.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:49:27 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-audit@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/15] don't reallocate buffer in every audit_sockaddr()
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:11:10 +0000 Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> int audit_sockaddr(int len, void *a)
> {
> - struct audit_aux_data_sockaddr *ax;
> struct audit_context *context = current->audit_context;
>
> if (likely(!context || context->dummy))
> return 0;
>
> - ax = kmalloc(sizeof(*ax) + len, GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!ax)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> -
> - ax->len = len;
> - memcpy(ax->a, a, len);
> + if (!context->sockaddr) {
> + void *p = kmalloc(sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage), GFP_KERNEL);
argh, I really hate having to run all around the code verifying that
the type passed to sizeof matches the type that we'll be storing there :(
> + if (!p)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + context->sockaddr = p;
> + }
>
> - ax->d.type = AUDIT_SOCKADDR;
> - ax->d.next = context->aux;
> - context->aux = (void *)ax;
> + context->sockaddr_len = len;
> + memcpy(context->sockaddr, a, len);
> return 0;
> }
stoopid question: can an audit_contect be shared between
threads/processes? If so, is locking needed around the read/test/write
of context->sockaddr and friends?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists