[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQA23w39aaho1wkPawX7zxiGyTVQroZzpACKk8DK8-F8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 10:01:43 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Cc: mszeredi@...hat.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, simo@...hat.com,
jlayton@...hat.com, carlos@...hat.com, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, dhowells@...hat.com,
Linux-Audit Mailing List <linux-audit@...hat.com>,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, luto@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
trondmy@...marydata.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V1 01/12] audit: add container id
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 02:41:04PM -0500, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> ...
>> +static inline bool audit_containerid_set(struct task_struct *tsk)
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> the calls to audit_containerid_set() confused me. Could you make it
> is_audit_containerid_set() or audit_containerid_isset()?
I haven't gone through the entire patchset yet, but I wanted to
quickly comment on this ... I really dislike the
function-names-as-sentences approach and would would greatly prefer
audit_containerid_isset().
>> +{
>> + return audit_get_containerid(tsk) != INVALID_CID;
>> +}
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists