Re: [PATCH] new audit rule interface
Of the three, I prefer audit_rule_transport, but it seems
unnecessarily long to me. I suppose we could shorten it to
audit_rule_trans, but I'm not sure that's any more readable than
'xprt'.
What do you think about changing the comment to make it more
descriptive? i.e.,
/* audit_rule_xprt is used to transport audit filter rule content
* between kernel and userspace. It supports filter rules with both
* integer and string fields and corresponds with AUDIT_ADD_RULE,
* AUDIT_DEL_RULE and AUDIT_LIST_RULES requests.
*/
Amy
IMHO changing audit_rule_xprt to audit_rule_transport does make it more
readable.
But then does that also mean changing all occurrences of 'xprt' to
'transport' for consistency?
i.e.
xprt->buf becomes transport->buf
audit_krule_to_xprt() becomes audit_krule_to_transport()
Not sure that changing one and leaving the others 'xprt' really helps the
overall readability.