From: Paul Moore <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>,
Linux-Audit Mailing List <[email protected]>,
LKML <[email protected]>,
[email protected], Eric Paris <[email protected]>,
Steve Grubb <[email protected]>, Stefan Roesch <[email protected]>,
Christian Brauner <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 17:53:24 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhRpu7WZDqWKcLDj18A0Z5FJdUU=eUL3wbJH1CnEBWB4GA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 5:46 PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 1/27/23 3:38 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 2:43 PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 1/27/23 12:42 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:40 PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> On 1/27/23 10:23 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> >>>>> A couple of updates to the iouring ops audit bypass selections suggested in
> >>>>> consultation with Steve Grubb.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Richard Guy Briggs (2):
> >>>>> io_uring,audit: audit IORING_OP_FADVISE but not IORING_OP_MADVISE
> >>>>> io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR
> >>>>>
> >>>>> io_uring/opdef.c | 4 +++-
> >>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Look fine to me - we should probably add stable to both of them, just
> >>>> to keep things consistent across releases. I can queue them up for 6.3.
> >>>
> >>> Please hold off until I've had a chance to look them over ...
> >>
> >> I haven't taken anything yet, for things like this I always let it
> >> simmer until people have had a chance to do so.
> >
> > Thanks. FWIW, that sounds very reasonable to me, but I've seen lots
> > of different behaviors across subsystems and wanted to make sure we
> > were on the same page.
>
> Sounds fair. BTW, can we stop CC'ing closed lists on patch
> submissions? Getting these:
>
> Your message to Linux-audit awaits moderator approval
>
> on every reply is really annoying.
We kinda need audit related stuff on the linux-audit list, that's our
mailing list for audit stuff.
However, I agree that it is crap that the linux-audit list is
moderated, but unfortunately that isn't something I control (I haven't
worked for RH in years, and even then the list owner was really weird
about managing the list). Occasionally I grumble about moving the
kernel audit development to a linux-audit list on vger but haven't
bothered yet, perhaps this is as good a reason as any.
Richard, Steve - any chance of opening the linux-audit list?
--
paul-moore.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-27 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-27 17:23 [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 17:23 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] io_uring,audit: audit IORING_OP_FADVISE but not IORING_OP_MADVISE Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:35 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 22:45 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:57 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 16:48 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-27 23:02 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:03 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 23:08 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:55 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:05 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 17:23 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 22:43 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 23:01 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:05 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-28 0:07 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 0:06 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-28 0:19 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-28 17:26 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-29 23:37 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 17:40 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 19:42 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 19:43 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:38 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 22:46 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 22:53 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2023-01-27 23:02 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-27 23:07 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2023-01-27 23:08 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-27 23:10 ` Jens Axboe
2023-01-28 16:47 ` Steve Grubb
2023-01-28 17:03 ` Paul Moore
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='CAHC9VhRpu7WZDqWKcLDj18A0Z5FJdUU=eUL3wbJH1CnEBWB4GA@mail.gmail.com' \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[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