[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTOxzcJpVSFDign56jkkruQjujTp7GQzk107FNWYTXRYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 08:25:21 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>, linux-audit@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.10 070/111] audit: fix auditd/kernel connection state tracking
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 7:37 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:30:56PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> 4.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
>> + if (!(auditd_test_task(current) ||
>> + (current == __mutex_owner(&audit_cmd_mutex)))) {
>> + long stime = audit_backlog_wait_time;
>
> Since I cannot find the original email on lkml, NAK on this.
> __mutex_owner() is not a general purpose helper function.
Since this code also exists in the current kernel, I need to ask what
recommended alternatives exist for determining the mutex owner?
I imagine we could track the mutex owner separately in the audit
subsystem, but I'd much prefer to leverage an existing mechanism if
possible.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists