On Wed 03-10-18 18:08:14, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:06 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Allocate fsnotify mark independently instead of embedding it inside
> > chunk. This will allow us to just replace chunk attached to mark when
> > growing / shrinking chunk instead of replacing mark attached to inode
> > which is a more complex operation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > kernel/audit_tree.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> > 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/audit_tree.c b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > index 0cd08b3581f1..481fdc190c2f 100644
> > --- a/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> > @@ -142,10 +148,33 @@ static void audit_mark_put_chunk(struct audit_chunk *chunk)
> > call_rcu(&chunk->head, __put_chunk);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline struct audit_tree_mark *audit_mark(struct fsnotify_mark *entry)
> > +{
> > + return container_of(entry, struct audit_tree_mark, mark);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct audit_chunk *mark_chunk(struct fsnotify_mark *mark)
> > +{
> > + return audit_mark(mark)->chunk;
> > +}
> > +
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -426,7 +460,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
> > if (!old_entry)
> > return create_chunk(inode, tree);
> >
> > - old = container_of(old_entry, struct audit_chunk, mark);
> > + old = mark_chunk(old_entry)->chunk;
>
> I'm pretty sure you mean the following instead?
>
> old = mark_chunk(old_entry);
Right, it gets fixed up in a later patch but it would be good to fix it here
(e.g. not to break bisection).
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
