From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751875AbaCHGfo (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2014 01:35:44 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:47490 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751330AbaCHGez (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2014 01:34:55 -0500 Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 01:34:51 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20140308.013451.1713896236113364692.davem@davemloft.net> To: sgrubb@redhat.com Cc: eparis@redhat.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, rgb@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] audit: Simplify by assuming the callers socket buffer is large enough From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <5147229.ivUnbSCGlH@x2> References: <1394232722.17779.57.camel@flatline.rdu.redhat.com> <20140307.194801.1893514114998807038.davem@davemloft.net> <5147229.ivUnbSCGlH@x2> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Fri, 07 Mar 2014 22:34:54 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Steve Grubb Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 22:27:28 -0500 > On Friday, March 07, 2014 07:48:01 PM David Miller wrote: >> From: Eric Paris >> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:52:02 -0500 >> >> > Audit is non-tolerant to failure and loss. >> >> Netlink is not a loss-less transport. > > Perhaps. But in all our testing over the years its been very good. What I really meant by that was that there is flow control. You can push as much data reliably over it as you want, but you have to block when the socket limits are hit. And I'd say you might as well make the creator of the event do the blocking rather than making other threads do this.