[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cad01a17acc179cdd4ba2dabda68e7e0a49d9340.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:05:54 -0500
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
davem@...emloft.net, jarkko@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
serge@...lyn.com
Cc: keescook@...omium.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
weiyongjun1@...wei.com, nayna@...ux.ibm.com, ebiggers@...gle.com,
ardb@...nel.org, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, lszubowi@...hat.com,
jason@...c4.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, pjones@...hat.com,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 09/17] KEYS: Rename
get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction
Hi Eric,
On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 19:15 -0500, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> To improve clarity, rename get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction to
> get_secondary_restriction.
The existing name clarity is fine. Perhaps instead prefix the above
sentence with "In preparation for returning either the existing
restrict_link_by_builtin_and_secondary_trusted or the new restriction
that includes the trusted builtin, secondary and machine keys, ..."
>
> Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists