Re: [RFC][PATCH] audit: Simplify by assuming the callers socket buffer is large enough

[Eric Paris]

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 15:30 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Paris <eparis@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:52:02 -0500
> 
> > The second user Eric patched, audit_send_list(), can grow without bound.
> > The number of skb's is going to be the size of the number of audit rules
> > that root loaded.  We run the list of rules, generate an skb per rule,
> > and add all of them to an skb_buff_head.  We then pass the skb_buff_head
> > to a kthread so that current will be able to read/drain the socket.
> > There really is no limit to how big the skb_buff_head could possibly
> > grow.  This doesn't necessarily absolutely have to be lossless but it
> > can actually quite reasonably be a whole lot of data that needs to get
> > sent.  I know of no way to deliver unbounded lengths of data to the
> > current task via netlink without blocking on more space in the socket.
> > Even if the socket rmem was MAX_INT, how can we deliver more?  The rule
> > size is unbounded.  How do I get an unbounded amount of data onto this
> > side of the socket when I have to generate it all during the request...
> 
> This is what netlink dumps  are for.  It is how we are able to dump
> routing tables with millions of routes to userspace.
> 
> By using normal netlink requests and netlink_unicast() for this, you
> are ignoring an entire mechanism in netlink designed specifically to
> handle this kind of situation.
> 
> Netlink dumps track state and build one or more SKBs (as necessary),
> one by one, to form the reply.  It implements flow control, state
> tracking for iteration, optimized SKB sizing and allocation, etc.

Awesome.  I'll see what I can find!


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/