From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Overhaul the audit filename handling Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 08:58:50 -0800 Message-ID: <54C12C4A.5080108@roeck-us.net> References: <20150122045303.1347.98054.stgit@localhost> <54C08C62.8010609@roeck-us.net> <3252765.lrITUkIS9l@sifl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, rgb@redhat.com, sd@queasysnail.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk To: Paul Moore Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3252765.lrITUkIS9l@sifl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 01/22/2015 08:22 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 09:36:34 PM 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. > > This patchset currently lives, along with one other unrelated patch, in the > audit next branch: > > * git://git.infradead.org/users/pcmoore/audit > > I'm currently testing these in combination with the patch Al posted last > night. Assuming all goes well I'll drop them from the audit next branch and > toss all six patches (these plus Al's) into another branch in case Al wants to > pull them for the VFS tree. > The version in the audit next tree works with my qemu microblaze test, so feel free to add Tested-by: Guenter Roeck Guenter