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.