[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121002155338.GB22698@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:53:38 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Cc: viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, eparis@...hat.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-audit@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/49] audit: pass in dentry to audit_copy_inode
wherever possible
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 08:16:11PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> In some cases, we were passing in NULL even when we have a dentry.
>
> Reported-by: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
> ---
> kernel/auditsc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/auditsc.c b/kernel/auditsc.c
> index 4b96415..5c45b9b 100644
> --- a/kernel/auditsc.c
> +++ b/kernel/auditsc.c
> @@ -2226,7 +2226,7 @@ void __audit_inode_child(const struct dentry *dentry,
> if (!strcmp(dname, n->name) ||
> !audit_compare_dname_path(dname, n->name, &dirlen)) {
> if (inode)
> - audit_copy_inode(n, NULL, inode);
> + audit_copy_inode(n, dentry, inode);
Btw, the calling conventions here also seems fairly ugly.
Instead of the optional dentry parameter I'd have a audit_copy_inode
that takes just the name and the inode, and an optional direct call
to audit_copy_fcaps for those callers that have a dentry. That would
also allow removing the branch for the dentry == NULL case in
audit_copy_fcaps.
--
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