On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 9:20 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 2018-05-14 17:54, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 9:58 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > The audit-related parameters in struct task_struct should ideally be
> > collected together and accessed through a standard audit API.
> >
> > Collect the existing loginuid, sessionid and audit_context together in a
> > new struct audit_task_info called "audit" in struct task_struct.
> >
> > See:
https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-kernel/issues/81
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
> > ---
> > MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
> > include/linux/audit.h | 10 +++++-----
> > include/linux/audit_task.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/sched.h | 6 ++----
> > init/init_task.c | 7 +++++--
> > kernel/auditsc.c | 6 +++---
> > 6 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 include/linux/audit_task.h
>
> I'm not going to merge this right now; there is still the question of
> static vs dynamic (as mentioned in 0/5) and with the main motivation
> being the audit container ID work, I think it would be good to wait
> for the next round of those patches before committing to something.
Agreed. I included it for completeness...
That's what I figured based on the cover letter, and the RFC tag, I
just felt a comment making things clear would be helpful.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com