Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Overhaul the audit filename handling

Guenter Roeck
2015-01-22T17:13:45Z

On 01/21/2015 11:54 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 09:36:34PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 01/21/2015 08:59 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> This patchset has some important changes from the previous revision,
>>> namely a fix from Al Viro (included in 2/5) that resolves a boot panic
>>> on some systems as well as some smaller, less noteworthy fixes found
>>> in the linux-next announcement thread from January 20th (refcount bump
>>> in __audit_reusename() and a inode type in __audit_inode()).
>>>
>>> This patchset still needs some additional testing to verify that the
>>> audit code still functions properly (the minor fixes mentioned above)
>>> and there is an additional patch from Al that should be included as
>>> well, but I wanted to post this and push the series to the audit next
>>> branch quickly since a number of folks were affected by the boot panic.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Paul Moore (5):
>>> fs: rework getname_kernel to handle up to PATH_MAX sized filenames
>>> fs: create proper filename objects using getname_kernel()
>>> audit: enable filename recording via getname_kernel()
>>> audit: fix filename matching in __audit_inode() and __audit_inode_child()
>>> audit: replace getname()/putname() hacks with reference counters
>>>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> What is the baseline for this patch set ? Obviously -next won't work,
>> and it does not apply to mainline either.
>
> FWIW, I've ported that on top of vfs.git#for-next; result is in
> vfs.git#experimental. Paul, are you OK with that one?
>
I also tested that one. Works as expected.

Thanks,
Guenter