audit.50 kernel

[Timothy R. Chavez]

On Thursday 26 May 2005 10:56, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 10:50 -0500, Timothy R. Chavez wrote:
> > Well... you're building RPMs with the hash table stuff... so did you want to branch?
> > Because I need to be able to test and fix bugs so that I can submit to LKML.  Maybe
> > I'm not following ya.  You want one implementation (the hash table) for Redhat-only
> > kernels and a separate (i_audit) implementation for mainline?
> 
> Well the theory was the hash table stuff wouldn't really affect the
> testing much. So having it as an addon only in the RPM would be at least
> feasible. 
> 
> In fact I think it might be useful to use the hash table in the mainline
> version too, and allocate each inode's audit data only on demand --
> we're currently allocating it for _every_ inode at the moment when in
> fact it's rarely going to be used. But I was going to make that
> suggestion in 'diff -up' form instead of just waffling about it ;)

I'm fine with the hash table piece.  It will require more testing, yes.  However,
I'd just like to get the i_audit implementation to a state where Steve can run
it and not crash ;-)... ya know, make sure I address those bugs first and
not allow them to burrow deeper.

-tim