Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:47:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org> To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> cc: Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@...el.com>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, deneen.t.dock@...el.com, kristen@...ux.intel.com, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] Smack: Prepare for PTRACE_MODE_SCHED On Thu, 27 Sep 2018, Jann Horn wrote: > > Yes. Since the PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT was in PTRACE_MODE_IBPB in Jiri's > > previous patch set and not in PTRACE_MODE_SCHED in this one I assumed > > that there was a good reason for it. > > Jiri, was there a good reason for it, and if so, what was it? [ FWIW PTRACE_MODE_NOAUDIT being in PTRACE_MODE_IBPB goes back to original Tim's pre-CRD patchset ] Well, we can't really call out into audit from scheduler code, and the previous versions of the patchsets didn't have PTRACE_MODE_SCHED, so it had to be included in PTRACE_MODE_IBPB in order to make sure we're not calling into audit from context switch code. Or did I misunderstand the question? Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.