Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs

On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:46:15PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> I don't object to the concept per se, but could you please give it a
> more descriptive name please? "struct vfs_intent" would be a lot more
> accurate than "nameidata2".

Agreed, but I prefer lookup_intent - intent by itself is a word with
just to wide useage and vfs doesn't make it much clearer..

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
    • From: Trond Myklebust <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFD 1/4] Pass no useless nameidata to the create, lookup, and permission IOPs
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.22-rcX Transmeta/APM regression
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
• Next by thread: NDAs - ANY KNOWN RULES?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]