From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [RFC] struct filename, io_uring and audit troubles
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 16:07:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240923150745.GB3550746@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 12:30:48AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 1) Just don't reuse the entry. Then we can drop the struct
> filename->aname completely as well. Yes that might incur an extra
> alloc for the odd case of audit_enabled and being deep enough that
> the preallocated names have been used, but doesn't anyone really
> care? It'll be noise in the overhead anyway. Side note - that would
> unalign struct filename again. Would be nice to drop audit_names from
> a core fs struct...
You'll get different output in logs, though. Whether that breaks userland
setups/invalidates certifications/etc.... fuck knows.
If anything, a loop through the list, searching for matching entry would
be safer in that respect. Order of the items... might or might not be
an issue - see above.
> 2) Add a ref to struct audit_names, RCU kfree it when it drops to zero.
> This would mean dropping struct audit_context->preallocated_names, as
Costly, that.
> otherwise we'd run into trouble there if a context gets blown away
> while someone else has a ref to that audit_names struct. We could do
> this without a ref as well, as long as we can store an audit_context
> pointer in struct audit_names and be able to validate it under RCU.
> If ctx doesn't match, don't use it.
That's one of the variants I mentioned upthread...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-23 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-22 0:49 [RFC] struct filename, io_uring and audit troubles Al Viro
2024-09-22 4:10 ` Al Viro
2024-09-22 15:09 ` Al Viro
2024-09-23 1:50 ` Al Viro
2024-09-23 6:30 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-23 12:54 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-23 14:48 ` Al Viro
2024-09-23 16:14 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-23 18:17 ` Al Viro
2024-09-23 23:49 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-23 20:36 ` Al Viro
2024-09-24 0:11 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-24 7:01 ` Al Viro
2024-09-24 23:17 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-25 20:44 ` Al Viro
2024-09-25 20:58 ` Paul Moore
2024-09-24 21:40 ` Al Viro
2024-09-25 6:01 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-25 17:39 ` Al Viro
2024-09-25 17:58 ` Jens Axboe
2024-09-26 3:56 ` Al Viro
2024-09-23 15:07 ` Al Viro [this message]
2024-09-24 11:15 ` Jens Axboe
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=20240923150745.GB3550746@ZenIV \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox