[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5147229.ivUnbSCGlH@x2>
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 22:27:28 -0500
From: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: eparis@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, rgb@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-audit@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] audit: Simplify by assuming the callers socket buffer is large enough
On Friday, March 07, 2014 07:48:01 PM David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:52:02 -0500
>
> > Audit is non-tolerant to failure and loss.
>
> Netlink is not a loss-less transport.
Perhaps. But in all our testing over the years its been very good.
-Steve
--
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