Hello,
Once again, renamed iterators "idx" to "i", to be in harmony
with the old unwritten C convention, and with the rest of the code.
Signed-off-by: Vesa-Matti Kari <vmkari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
security/selinux/netif.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- security-testing-2.6/security/selinux/netif.c 2008-07-20 18:29:22.000000000 +0300
+++ security-testing-2.6-vmk2/security/selinux/netif.c 2008-07-21 02:17:42.000000000 +0300
@@ -67,10 +67,10 @@ static inline u32 sel_netif_hashfn(int i
*/
static inline struct sel_netif *sel_netif_find(int ifindex)
{
- int idx = sel_netif_hashfn(ifindex);
+ int i = sel_netif_hashfn(ifindex);
struct sel_netif *netif;
- list_for_each_entry_rcu(netif, &sel_netif_hash[idx], list)
+ list_for_each_entry_rcu(netif, &sel_netif_hash[i], list)
/* all of the devices should normally fit in the hash, so we
* optimize for that case */
if (likely(netif->nsec.ifindex == ifindex))
@@ -90,13 +90,13 @@ static inline struct sel_netif *sel_neti
*/
static int sel_netif_insert(struct sel_netif *netif)
{
- int idx;
+ int i;
if (sel_netif_total >= SEL_NETIF_HASH_MAX)
return -ENOSPC;
- idx = sel_netif_hashfn(netif->nsec.ifindex);
- list_add_rcu(&netif->list, &sel_netif_hash[idx]);
+ i = sel_netif_hashfn(netif->nsec.ifindex);
+ list_add_rcu(&netif->list, &sel_netif_hash[i]);
sel_netif_total++;
return 0;
@@ -257,12 +257,12 @@ static void sel_netif_kill(int ifindex)
*/
static void sel_netif_flush(void)
{
- int idx;
+ int i;
struct sel_netif *netif;
spin_lock_bh(&sel_netif_lock);
- for (idx = 0; idx < SEL_NETIF_HASH_SIZE; idx++)
- list_for_each_entry(netif, &sel_netif_hash[idx], list)
+ for (i = 0; i < SEL_NETIF_HASH_SIZE; i++)
+ list_for_each_entry(netif, &sel_netif_hash[i], list)
sel_netif_destroy(netif);
spin_unlock_bh(&sel_netif_lock);
}
--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
