2013-10-23 11:24:19

by Gao feng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] audit: change pid to portid for audit_reply

The "pid" is not a suitable name for netlink port,
change it to "portid".

more information, please see commit
15e473046cb6e5d18a4d0057e61d76315230382b

Signed-off-by: Gao feng <[email protected]>
---
kernel/audit.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
index 7b0e23a..50fdcba 100644
--- a/kernel/audit.c
+++ b/kernel/audit.c
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ struct audit_buffer {
};

struct audit_reply {
- int pid;
+ int portid;
struct sk_buff *skb;
};

@@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ int audit_send_list(void *_dest)
return 0;
}

-struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done,
+struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int portid, int seq, int type, int done,
int multi, const void *payload, int size)
{
struct sk_buff *skb;
@@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done,
if (!skb)
return NULL;

- nlh = nlmsg_put(skb, pid, seq, t, size, flags);
+ nlh = nlmsg_put(skb, portid, seq, t, size, flags);
if (!nlh)
goto out_kfree_skb;
data = nlmsg_data(nlh);
@@ -521,13 +521,13 @@ static int audit_send_reply_thread(void *arg)

/* Ignore failure. It'll only happen if the sender goes away,
because our timeout is set to infinite. */
- netlink_unicast(audit_sock, reply->skb, reply->pid, 0);
+ netlink_unicast(audit_sock, reply->skb, reply->portid, 0);
kfree(reply);
return 0;
}
/**
* audit_send_reply - send an audit reply message via netlink
- * @pid: process id to send reply to
+ * @portid: the portid of netlink socket
* @seq: sequence number
* @type: audit message type
* @done: done (last) flag
@@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ static int audit_send_reply_thread(void *arg)
* Allocates an skb, builds the netlink message, and sends it to the pid.
* No failure notifications.
*/
-static void audit_send_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
+static void audit_send_reply(int portid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
const void *payload, int size)
{
struct sk_buff *skb;
@@ -549,11 +549,11 @@ static void audit_send_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
if (!reply)
return;

- skb = audit_make_reply(pid, seq, type, done, multi, payload, size);
+ skb = audit_make_reply(portid, seq, type, done, multi, payload, size);
if (!skb)
goto out;

- reply->pid = pid;
+ reply->portid = portid;
reply->skb = skb;

tsk = kthread_run(audit_send_reply_thread, reply, "audit_send_reply");
--
1.8.3.1


2013-10-23 19:20:17

by Richard Guy Briggs

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: change pid to portid for audit_reply

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 07:25:23PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
> The "pid" is not a suitable name for netlink port,
> change it to "portid".

That is already in the works:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2013-August/msg00023.html
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/20/630

May I add your Signed-off-by: to that previous patch?

> more information, please see commit
> 15e473046cb6e5d18a4d0057e61d76315230382b
>
> Signed-off-by: Gao feng <[email protected]>
> ---
> kernel/audit.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
> index 7b0e23a..50fdcba 100644
> --- a/kernel/audit.c
> +++ b/kernel/audit.c
> @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ struct audit_buffer {
> };
>
> struct audit_reply {
> - int pid;
> + int portid;
> struct sk_buff *skb;
> };
>
> @@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ int audit_send_list(void *_dest)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done,
> +struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int portid, int seq, int type, int done,
> int multi, const void *payload, int size)
> {
> struct sk_buff *skb;
> @@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ struct sk_buff *audit_make_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done,
> if (!skb)
> return NULL;
>
> - nlh = nlmsg_put(skb, pid, seq, t, size, flags);
> + nlh = nlmsg_put(skb, portid, seq, t, size, flags);
> if (!nlh)
> goto out_kfree_skb;
> data = nlmsg_data(nlh);
> @@ -521,13 +521,13 @@ static int audit_send_reply_thread(void *arg)
>
> /* Ignore failure. It'll only happen if the sender goes away,
> because our timeout is set to infinite. */
> - netlink_unicast(audit_sock, reply->skb, reply->pid, 0);
> + netlink_unicast(audit_sock, reply->skb, reply->portid, 0);
> kfree(reply);
> return 0;
> }
> /**
> * audit_send_reply - send an audit reply message via netlink
> - * @pid: process id to send reply to
> + * @portid: the portid of netlink socket
> * @seq: sequence number
> * @type: audit message type
> * @done: done (last) flag
> @@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ static int audit_send_reply_thread(void *arg)
> * Allocates an skb, builds the netlink message, and sends it to the pid.
> * No failure notifications.
> */
> -static void audit_send_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
> +static void audit_send_reply(int portid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
> const void *payload, int size)
> {
> struct sk_buff *skb;
> @@ -549,11 +549,11 @@ static void audit_send_reply(int pid, int seq, int type, int done, int multi,
> if (!reply)
> return;
>
> - skb = audit_make_reply(pid, seq, type, done, multi, payload, size);
> + skb = audit_make_reply(portid, seq, type, done, multi, payload, size);
> if (!skb)
> goto out;
>
> - reply->pid = pid;
> + reply->portid = portid;
> reply->skb = skb;
>
> tsk = kthread_run(audit_send_reply_thread, reply, "audit_send_reply");
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
> --
> Linux-audit mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <[email protected]>
Senior Software Engineer
Kernel Security
AMER ENG Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Canada
Voice: +1.647.777.2635
Internal: (81) 32635
Alt: +1.613.693.0684x3545

2013-10-24 00:41:20

by Gao feng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: change pid to portid for audit_reply

On 10/24/2013 03:20 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 07:25:23PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
>> The "pid" is not a suitable name for netlink port,
>> change it to "portid".
>
> That is already in the works:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/linux-audit/2013-August/msg00023.html
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/20/630
>
> May I add your Signed-off-by: to that previous patch?

Oops, I didn't notice that. you can add my Signed-off-by if you wish :)

Thanks