Re: [PATCH v35 23/29] Audit: Create audit_stamp structure

On 4/26/2022 12:18 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 2:58 PM John Johansen > <john.johansen(a)canonical.com&gt; wrote: >> On 4/26/22 11:03, Paul Moore wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 7:31 PM John Johansen >>> <john.johansen(a)canonical.com&gt; wrote: >>>> On 4/18/22 07:59, Casey Schaufler wrote: >>>>> Replace the timestamp and serial number pair used in audit records >>>>> with a structure containing the two elements. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <casey(a)schaufler-ca.com&gt; >>>>> Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul(a)paul-moore.com&gt; >>>>> --- >>>>> kernel/audit.c | 17 +++++++++-------- >>>>> kernel/audit.h | 12 +++++++++--- >>>>> kernel/auditsc.c | 22 +++++++++------------- >>>>> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) >>> ... >>> >>>>> diff --git a/kernel/audit.h b/kernel/audit.h >>>>> index 4af63e7dde17..260dab6e0e15 100644 >>>>> --- a/kernel/audit.h >>>>> +++ b/kernel/audit.h >>>>> @@ -108,10 +114,10 @@ struct audit_context { >>>>> AUDIT_CTX_URING, /* in use by io_uring */ >>>>> } context; >>>>> enum audit_state state, current_state; >>>>> + struct audit_stamp stamp; /* event identifier */ >>>>> unsigned int serial; /* serial number for record */ >>>> shouldn't we be dropping serial from the audit_context, since we have >>>> moved it into the audit_stamp? >>> Unless we make some significant changes to audit_log_start() we still >>> need to preserve a timestamp in the audit_context so that regularly >>> associated audit records can share a common timestamp (which is what >>> groups multiple records into a single "event"). >>> >> sure, but the patch changes things to use ctx->stamp.serial instead of >> ctx->serial ... > My apologies, I read your original comment wrong; I was thinking you > were suggesting removing the timestamp info from audit_context in > favor of using the timestamp info contained in the audit_buffer. > > Yes, audit_context:serial is no longer needed with audit_context:stamp. Thank you for catching that. Easy (I expect) fix. BTW, I'm not supposed to be working the next few weeks, but I should be able to sneak v36 in before the next merge window.