On Fri 07-03-25 14:19:38, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> On 2025-03-07 15:52, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Thu 06-03-25 20:12:23, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > > On 2025-03-06 16:06, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > On Wed 05-03-25 16:33:19, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > > > > When no audit rules are in place, fanot
On Mar 7, 2025 Jasjiv Singh wrote:
>
> Users of IPE require a way to identify when and why an operation fails,
> allowing them to both respond to violations of policy and be notified
> of potentially malicious actions on their systems with respect to IPE.
>
> This patch introduces a new error f
While the structure is refcounted, the only consumer incrementing it is
audit and even then the atomic operation is only needed when it
interacts with io_uring.
If putname spots a count of 1, there is no legitimate way for anyone to
bump it.
If audit is disabled, the count is guaranteed to be 1,
