Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] two suggested iouring op audit updates

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 5:46 PM Jens Axboe <axboe(a)kernel.dk&gt; wrote: > On 1/27/23 3:38 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 2:43 PM Jens Axboe <axboe(a)kernel.dk&gt; wrote: >>> On 1/27/23 12:42 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:40 PM Jens Axboe <axboe(a)kernel.dk&gt; wrote: >>>>> On 1/27/23 10:23 AM, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: >>>>>> A couple of updates to the iouring ops audit bypass selections suggested in >>>>>> consultation with Steve Grubb. >>>>>> >>>>>> Richard Guy Briggs (2): >>>>>> io_uring,audit: audit IORING_OP_FADVISE but not IORING_OP_MADVISE >>>>>> io_uring,audit: do not log IORING_OP_*GETXATTR >>>>>> >>>>>> io_uring/opdef.c | 4 +++- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> Look fine to me - we should probably add stable to both of them, just >>>>> to keep things consistent across releases. I can queue them up for 6.3. >>>> >>>> Please hold off until I've had a chance to look them over ... >>> >>> I haven't taken anything yet, for things like this I always let it >>> simmer until people have had a chance to do so. >> >> Thanks. FWIW, that sounds very reasonable to me, but I've seen lots >> of different behaviors across subsystems and wanted to make sure we >> were on the same page. > > Sounds fair. BTW, can we stop CC'ing closed lists on patch > submissions? Getting these: > > Your message to Linux-audit awaits moderator approval > > on every reply is really annoying. We kinda need audit related stuff on the linux-audit list, that's our mailing list for audit stuff.