* Steve Grubb (sgrubb(a)redhat.com) wrote:
On Sunday 08 May 2005 09:47, Steve Grubb wrote:
> Also, should audit_expand take a parameter to suggest how big to grow? For
> example, the buffer is inited to 1024, but it need to put a PATH_MAX sized
> filename into a message. In audit_vformat, if does 1 if statement and then
> one increment. So now the buffer is 2048. That's still too small for a 4096
> byte filename. Either the call to expand should be in a while loop, or it
> should take a hint.
The patch I sent doesn't handle this. I'm not going to have time for this
today if someone else wants to take a shot at it. I think its best to send
either a param indicating the size of increase needed or total needed.
I had intended on augmenting audit_expand to take a len as a hint. But
had planned that as cleanups after core changes are done. I'll get to
that today, and push out all the little cleanup bits I have this
evening.
thanks,
-chris