From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] fixing audit rule ordering mess, part 1
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:10:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1229548244.3384.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081217205902.GH28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 20:59 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 01:28:08PM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
>
> > I don't see why prio is only important on AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT. Couldn't I
> > end up with stupidity with entry,never ?
>
>
> AUDIT_WATCH and AUDIT_INODE can live only on exit chain. I.e. we don't have
> that problem - other chains sit on the lists of their own and there the
> list ordering itself takes care of everything. Exit chain has parts in
> sitting in hash instead of the primary list.
Makes perfect sense. They all look good to me.
-Eric
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] fixing audit rule ordering mess, part 1
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:10:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1229548244.3384.49.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081217205902.GH28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 20:59 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 01:28:08PM -0500, Eric Paris wrote:
>
> > I don't see why prio is only important on AUDIT_FILTER_EXIT. Couldn't I
> > end up with stupidity with entry,never ?
>
>
> AUDIT_WATCH and AUDIT_INODE can live only on exit chain. I.e. we don't have
> that problem - other chains sit on the lists of their own and there the
> list ordering itself takes care of everything. Exit chain has parts in
> sitting in hash instead of the primary list.
Makes perfect sense. They all look good to me.
-Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-17 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-17 5:12 [PATCH 11/15] fixing audit rule ordering mess, part 1 Al Viro
2008-12-17 7:48 ` James Morris
2008-12-17 18:28 ` Eric Paris
2008-12-17 20:59 ` Al Viro
2008-12-17 21:10 ` Eric Paris [this message]
2008-12-17 21:10 ` Eric Paris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1229548244.3384.49.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.