[PATCH] Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET

[PATCH] Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET

[Al Viro]

From: Miloslav Trmac <mitr@redhat.com>

Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET to avoid a conflict with netlink message types
already used in the wild.

Signed-off-by: Miloslav Trmac <mitr@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
---
Please, apply.  That really ought to go in before .final ;-/
 audit.h |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/audit.h b/include/linux/audit.h
index 4bbd860..d6579df 100644
--- a/include/linux/audit.h
+++ b/include/linux/audit.h
@@ -63,8 +63,8 @@
 #define AUDIT_ADD_RULE		1011	/* Add syscall filtering rule */
 #define AUDIT_DEL_RULE		1012	/* Delete syscall filtering rule */
 #define AUDIT_LIST_RULES	1013	/* List syscall filtering rules */
-#define AUDIT_TTY_GET		1014	/* Get TTY auditing status */
-#define AUDIT_TTY_SET		1015	/* Set TTY auditing status */
+#define AUDIT_TTY_GET		1016	/* Get TTY auditing status */
+#define AUDIT_TTY_SET		1017	/* Set TTY auditing status */
 
 #define AUDIT_FIRST_USER_MSG	1100	/* Userspace messages mostly uninteresting to kernel */
 #define AUDIT_USER_AVC		1107	/* We filter this differently */

Re: [PATCH] Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:19:53 +0100
Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:

> From: Miloslav Trmac <mitr@redhat.com>
> 
> Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET to avoid a conflict with netlink message
> types already used in the wild.

which are these? Were they in mainline or -mm before?

also, if this is so sensitive, at least add something that says to never ever use 1014/1015...

Re: [PATCH] Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET

[Al Viro]

On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 07:32:41AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:19:53 +0100
> Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > From: Miloslav Trmac <mitr@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Renumber AUDIT_TTY_[GS]ET to avoid a conflict with netlink message
> > types already used in the wild.
> 
> which are these? Were they in mainline or -mm before?
> 
> also, if this is so sensitive, at least add something that says to never ever use 1014/1015...

AUDIT_TTY_*ET went into mainline directly and I'd missed the conflict with
the numbers already in use by audit-subtree patches.  I *had* noticed when
pushing audit-subtree to -mm, swore at myself and renumbered those.  Alas,
there's userland to deal with.
	* auditctl has subtree support merged
	* auditctl still doesn't have tty... support merged
	* it's built with numbers matching the original patchset (1014/1015)
and binaries are released
	* audit-subtree patchset is in RH beta kernel, also released

Vote of auditctl maintainer had been "renumber tty_...* until it's too late,
since that's the one userland doesn't support yet".  The author of tty patches
agrees (see above) and I also think that this is the best way out of that mess.

Again, it's largely my fault - I'd missed the conflict in the first place and
hadn't reacted immediately.