Future directions for the dynamic linker auditing (LD_AUDIT) interface

[Florian Weimer]

* Jonathon Anderson:

> However, I would not hastily assume the current LD_AUDIT is sufficient
> to support all our use cases.  The conversations around recursive
> dlopen() and static TLS allocation stand out in my mind as "bugs" that
> could take dramatic changes to the auditor interface to properly
> resolve.

This is something we need to fix on the glibc side.  Maybe I'm reading
the conversation on the bug incorrectly, but I interpreted it as someone
expressing interest on working on it:

  <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31991>

If not patch materializes from that, I'll eventually have to come back
to that (but I'm juggling lots of other obligations).

> Even the lack of self-monitoring callbacks mentioned in BZ#31992 could
> pose a challenge.

Sorry, which aspect of the bug are you referring to?

Thanks,
Florian