public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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...

  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