On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote:
>
> Muahaha. The auditors have invaded your system. (I did my little
> benchmark with a more sensible configuration -- see way below).
>
> Can you send the output of:
>
> # auditctl -s
> # auditctl -l
# auditctl -s
enabled 1
flag 1
pid 822
rate_limit 0
backlog_limit 320
lost 0
backlog 0
backlog_wait_time 60000
loginuid_immutable 0 unlocked
# auditctl -l
No rules
> Are you, perchance, using Fedora?
F21. Yup.
I used to just disable auditing in the kernel entirely, but then I
ended up deciding that I need to run something closer to the broken
Fedora config (selinux in particular) in order to actually optimize
the real-world pathname handling situation rather than the _sane_ one.
Oh well. I think audit support got enabled at the same time in my
kernels because I ended up using the default config and then taking
out the truly crazy stuff without noticing AUDITSYSCALL.
> I lobbied rather heavily, and
> successfully, to get the default configuration to stop auditing.
> Unfortunately, the fix wasn't retroactive, so, unless you have a very
> fresh install, you might want to apply the fix yourself:
Is that fix happening in Fedora going forward, though? Like F22?
> Amdy Lumirtowsky thinks he meant to attach a condition to his
> maintainerish activities: he will do his best to keep the audit code
> *out* of the low-level stuff, but he's going to try to avoid ever
> touching the audit code itself, because if he ever had to change it,
> he might accidentally delete the entire file.
Oooh. That would be _such_ a shame.
Can we please do it by mistake? "Oops, my fingers slipped"
> Seriously, wasn't there a TAINT_PERFORMANCE thing proposed at some
> point? I would love auditing to set some really loud global warning
> that you've just done a Bad Thing (tm) performance-wise by enabling
> it.
Or even just a big fat warning in dmesg the first time auditing triggers.
> Back to timing. With kvm-clock, I see:
>
> 23.80% timing_test_64 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] pvclock_clocksource_read
Oh wow. How can that possibly be sane?
Isn't the *whole* point of pvclock_clocksource_read() to be a native
rdtsc with scaling? How does it cause that kind of insane pain?
Oh well. Some paravirt person would need to look and care.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
