[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52A21A38.40802@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:40:56 -0800
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>, linux-audit@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] smack: call WARN_ONCE() instead of calling audit_log_start()
On 12/4/2013 6:45 PM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> Remove the call to audit_log() (which call audit_log_start()) and deal with
> the errors in the caller, logging only once if the condition is met. Calling
> audit_log_start() in this location makes buffer allocation and locking more
> complicated in the calling tree (audit_filter_user()).
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
I'm not opposed to this change, but have you actually tried it?
> ---
> security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 5 ++---
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> index 8825375..185e2e7 100644
> --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> @@ -3615,9 +3615,8 @@ static int smack_audit_rule_match(u32 secid, u32 field, u32 op, void *vrule,
> struct smack_known *skp;
> char *rule = vrule;
>
> - if (!rule) {
> - audit_log(actx, GFP_ATOMIC, AUDIT_SELINUX_ERR,
> - "Smack: missing rule\n");
> + if (unlikely(!rule)) {
> + WARN_ONCE(1, "Smack: missing rule\n");
> return -ENOENT;
> }
>
--
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