lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH ghak90 V8 13/16] audit: track container nesting
    On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 1:12 PM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
    > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 10:52:36 AM EST Paul Moore wrote:
    > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:47 AM Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com> wrote:
    > > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 8:19:44 AM EST Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
    > > > > > The established pattern is that we print -1 when its unset and "?"
    > > > > > when
    > > > > > its totalling missing. So, how could this be invalid? It should be
    > > > > > set
    > > > > > or not. That is unless its totally missing just like when we do not
    > > > > > run
    > > > > > with selinux enabled and a context just doesn't exist.
    > > > >
    > > > > Ok, so in this case it is clearly unset, so should be -1, which will be
    > > > > a
    > > > > 20-digit number when represented as an unsigned long long int.
    > > > >
    > > > > Thank you for that clarification Steve.
    > > >
    > > > It is literally a -1. ( 2 characters)
    > >
    > > Well, not as Richard has currently written the code, it is a "%llu".
    > > This was why I asked the question I did; if we want the "-1" here we
    > > probably want to special case that as I don't think we want to display
    > > audit container IDs as signed numbers in general.
    >
    > OK, then go with the long number, we'll fix it in the interpretation. I guess
    > we do the same thing for auid.

    As I said above, I'm okay with a special case handling for unset/"-1"
    in this case.

    --
    paul moore
    www.paul-moore.com

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-02-05 23:58    [W:4.907 / U:0.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site