On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 10:14 AM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri 29-06-18 14:01:44, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 7:44 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 7:40 PM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > this series addresses the problems I have identified when trying to understand > > > > how exactly is kernel/audit_tree.c using generic fsnotify framework. I hope > > > > I have understood all the interactions right but careful review is certainly > > > > welcome (CCing Al as he was the one implementing this code originally). > > > > > > > > The patches have been tested by a stress test I have written which mounts & > > > > unmounts filesystems in the directory tree while adding and removing audit > > > > rules for this tree in parallel and accessing the tree to generate events. > > > > Still some real-world testing would be welcome. > > > > > > > > > > This sort of stress test sound really useful to fanotify/inotify as well. > > > Do plan to upstream that stress test? > > > > Agreed. > > > > I would be interested in having something like this in the > > audit-testsuite so that we can include it in our regular regression > > testing. > > > > * https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-testsuite > > OK, I'll look into integrating the test script into audit testsuite. Great, thank you. Even if you don't get around to it, posting it somewhere could still be helpful, e.g. I could use it to hammer on your patches too. Speaking of which, thank you very much for doing this work; I know how painful the audit code can be and I suspect this wasn't easy. I see you've already got some feedback from Amir (thank you Amir!) and I'm working my way through them too, but some vacation time is going to make progress a bit slow. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
