linux-kernel - audit_reusename in getname

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGudoHFLnmp3tQHOwUAFBKxrno=ejxHmJXta=sTxVMtN9L1T9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:07:09 +0100
From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, 
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: audit_reusename in getname_flags

You added it in:
commit 7ac86265dc8f665cc49d6e60a125e608cd2fca14
Author: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Date:   Wed Oct 10 15:25:28 2012 -0400

    audit: allow audit code to satisfy getname requests from its names_list

Do I read correctly this has no user-visible impact, but merely tries
to shave off some memory usage in case of duplicated user bufs?

This is partially getting in the way of whacking atomics for filename
ref management (but can be worked around).

AFAIU this change is not all *that* beneficial in its own right, so
should not be a big deal to whack it regardless of what happens with
refs? Note it would also remove some branches in the common case as
normally audit either has dummy context or there is no match anyway.

-- 
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>