From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79172385801F for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:33:22 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 79172385801F Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-435-NmxiHSQEOumIQjy9mSnYPg-1; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 07:33:19 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NmxiHSQEOumIQjy9mSnYPg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D180B102CB29; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:33:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.192.82]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F4731017CE3; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:33:16 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, John Mellor-Crummey , Ben Woodard , Vivek Das Mohapatra Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/22] elf: Suppress audit calls when a (new) namespace is empty (BZ #28062) References: <20211109183347.2943786-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20211109183347.2943786-5-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <871r3o5c77.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87o86qzyrk.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 13:33:14 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Adhemerval Zanella's message of "Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:25:29 -0300") Message-ID: <87zgqayir9.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:33:24 -0000 * Adhemerval Zanella: >> Hmm. I had a peeked at the Solaris documentation, and it says that >> LA_ACT_ADD uses the head link map of the namespace as a cookie. >> >> I really dislike that we produce a LA_ACT_DELETE without the >> corresponding LA_ACT_ADD due to this issue. >> >> Can we use the link map allocated used _dl_new_object as the cookie if >> the namespace is empty? This seems like the right thing to do here. >> The allocation happens just a few lines further down. > > But afaiu the LA_ACT_ADD activity is to inform already loaded objects > that a new object is being processed. Both man-pages and Solaris > documentation states 'objects are *being added*...', so I think passing > the cookie of the new allocated is not what the interface is suppose > to do. It's the only way to get a matching LA_ACT_DELETE call with the same cookie. It's not particularly clean, I agree, but I think it's better than a dropped LA_ACT_ADD. Thanks, Florian