On 2018-03-04 10:01, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Serge E. Hallyn <serge@xxxxxxxxxx> 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().
I'd be ok with this latter if necessary, but the naming mimics the
existing loginuid naming convention.
> >> +{
> >> + return audit_get_containerid(tsk) != INVALID_CID;
> >> +}
>
> paul moore
- RGB
--
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635
