Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180420134651.3badjswsokqs7hex@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
References: <08bd08ee9bc70f6e98b9e298ba6a2c0f4dcadb4b.1523372093.git.rgb@redhat.com>
 <CAHC9VhSxjEKNcdE2Mm-Vwef6RvTG2ykGFFmeAtVypAaPRvddmg@mail.gmail.com> <20180420134651.3badjswsokqs7hex@madcap2.tricolour.ca>
From:   Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Apr 2018 11:58:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQzsE1x33uvGkoioXcLvcmdOUUbajnyZ1-qw4xLjLj98Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ghak80 V1] audit: add syscall information to
 FEATURE_CHANGE records
To:     Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
Cc:     Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@redhat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>, Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2018-04-17 18:06, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Tie syscall information to FEATURE_CHANGE calls since it is a result of
>> > user action.
>> >
>> > See: https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/80
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
>> > ---
>> >  kernel/audit.c | 5 ++---
>> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
>> > index 8da24ef..23f125b 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/audit.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/audit.c
>> > @@ -1103,10 +1103,9 @@ static void audit_log_feature_change(int which, u32 old_feature, u32 new_feature
>> >  {
>> >         struct audit_buffer *ab;
>> >
>> > -       if (audit_enabled == AUDIT_OFF)
>> > +       if (!audit_enabled)
>>
>> Sooo, this is an unrelated style change, why?  Looking at the rest of
>> kernel/audit.c we seem to use a mix of "(!x)" and "(x == 0/CONST)" so
>> why are you adding noise to this patch?
>
> Ok, survey sez 25 instances of audit_enabled used as a boolean vs 7
> instances where it could be used as a boolean where the expression is
> made harder to read (in my opinion).  I thought it was worth changing to
> read the same way most of the other instances I've been reviewing are
> written.  There are only two where the non-boolean distiction with
> AUDIT_LOCKED is required.

Thanks for the explanation.

While I still believe this patch, and connecting records in general,
is the Right Thing To Do, I'm expecting there to be some hate mail on
this issue and I would like to keep the patch as small and as
straight-to-the-point as possible just so there is little confusion
about what is changing.

Please respin this without the style change and I'll merge it as soon
as I see it.  Alternatively, give me the "ok" and I'll merge the patch
now and just drop the style change; after all we're talking about one
line in a five line patch ;)

>> >                 return;
>> > -
>> > -       ab = audit_log_start(NULL, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_FEATURE_CHANGE);
>> > +       ab = audit_log_start(current->audit_context, GFP_KERNEL, AUDIT_FEATURE_CHANGE);
>>
>> This is the important part, and the Right Thing To Do.
>>
>> >         if (!ab)
>> >                 return;
>> >         audit_log_task_info(ab, current);

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com