Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 22:42:31 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 107125 for review Message-ID: <20061002224138.W32616@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <200610021731.43477.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200610022120.k92LK4cA000243@repoman.freebsd.org> <200610021731.43477.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday 02 October 2006 17:20, Robert Watson wrote: >> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=107125 >> >> Change 107125 by rwatson@rwatson_peppercorn on 2006/10/02 21:19:13 >> >> Audit events for getpath system calls, POSIX message kqueues. >> (Query: FreeBSD system calls are kmq*, but library interfaces are >> mq_* -- should the audit identifiers be MQ_*?). > > I would use MQ_* to stick with the userland API. Don't the audit events > typically reflect the userland API? Yes. The tricky distinction is that we're auditing the kernel events (as they are on the right side of the trust boundary), but we're typically interested in them as seen in user space, and with respect to documented APIs. I think you're right, they probably should be with respect to the published mq*(2) APIs. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061002224138.W32616>