* Steve Grubb (sgrubb(a)redhat.com) wrote:
On Friday 07 October 2005 12:49, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> Shouldn't this type of message be CCed to this list?
Offhand, I don't see the correlation between names_cache and audit system.
Following symlinks grabs memory from names_cache with raw __getname
meaning name is not added to names list in audit context. It then uses
putname to put it back which leaks because __putname is postponed until
exit, and during exit audit_free_names doesn't find anything on the list.