On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 13:44 -0500, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
On 14/12/18, Eric Paris wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 12:46 -0500, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > On 14/12/18, Eric Paris wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 11:45 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:09:54 -0500, Valdis Kletnieks said:
> > > > > Spotted these two while booting single-user on 20141216.
20141208
> > > > > doesn't throw these, so it's something in the last week
or so..
> > > >
> > > > Gaah! Turns out that 20141208 *is* susceptible - it had been
booting
> > > > just fine for several days, but it went around the bend, apparently
due
> > > > to a userspace or initrd change.
> > >
> > > $5 says you updated systemd?
> > >
> > > Richard?
> >
> > Ok, so if you are correct, then either we justify dropping the lock (I
> > assume the one commone to both BUG reports [sig->cred_guard_mutex] ),
> > or we make yet another queue were were hoping to avoid...
> >
> > It would also be good to narrow it down to a rule that triggers this.
>
> I thought the first message was enough to find the problem, but:
>
> static void kauditd_send_multicast_skb(struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> ...
> nlmsg_multicast(sock, copy, 0, AUDIT_NLGRP_READLOG, GFP_KERNEL);
> ...
> }
>
> Since kauditd_send_multicast_skb() gets called in audit_log_end(), which
> can come from any context (aka even a sleeping context) you can't use
> GFP_KERNEL. The audit_buffer know what context it should use. So pass
> that down and use that.
Ok, that looks more obvious now... We just need to change the internal
interface to kauditd_send_multicast_skb() to accept an audit_buffer
instead of just the skb and use the gfp_mask value from there instead of
using our own...
Thanks, Eric.
I'd suggest just sending the GFP type, not the who audit_buffer, but
that's up to you.
-Eric