[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [RFC][PATCH] (#6 U1) the latest incarnation



On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 11:52 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
> > I suppose may_create() won't help you, as the child has a negative
> > dentry at that point so you have no inode.  You will have an inode upon
> > the subsequent d_instantiate, but can't tell that you are dealing with a
> > "just created" inode versus an already existing one, so you won't know
> > that you need to notify of a create.  So you are back to post-create
> > style hooks for calling audit_notify_watch for file creations, right?
> 
> What was the problem with those, just hook proliferation?

I think that they are ok for notification (audit_notify_watch calls),
but they aren't safe for attaching watches (audit_attach_watch calls),
because the inode can be accessed via the dcache by another thread
before the post-create hooks run.  Hence, he still wants to keep hooks
for attaching watches in places like d_instantiate, but the notification
hooks can occur later in the processing, like the dnotify hooks.

-- 
Stephen Smalley <sds tycho nsa gov>
National Security Agency


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]