Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751751AbbHATon (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:44:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47132 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751614AbbHATom (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:44:42 -0400 From: Richard Guy Briggs To: linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Richard Guy Briggs , sgrubb@redhat.com, pmoore@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com Subject: [PATCH V4 (was V6)] generalize audit_del_rule Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 15:44:00 -0400 Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1036 Lines: 28 This patch was split out from the audit by executable path patch set due to the potential to use it elsewhere. In particular, some questions came up while assessing the potential for code reuse: Why does audit_remove_parent_watches() not call audit_del_rule() for each entry found? Is audit_signals not properly decremented? Is audit_n_rules not properly decremented? Why does kill_rules() not call audit_del_rule() for each entry found? Is audit_signals not properly decremented? Is audit_n_rules not properly decremented? Richard Guy Briggs (1): audit: save signal match info in case entry passed in is the one deleted kernel/auditfilter.c | 3 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/