Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 18:07:13 -0500
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, serge@hallyn.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] security: fix description of values returned by
 cap_inode_need_killpriv
Message-ID: <20170726230713.GB9916@mail.hallyn.com>
References: <1501093868-30838-1-git-send-email-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1501093868-30838-1-git-send-email-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1287
Lines: 38

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 02:31:08PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> cap_inode_need_killpriv returns 1 if security.capability exists,
> 0 otherwise. Fix the description of the return value to reflect this.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  security/commoncap.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/commoncap.c b/security/commoncap.c
> index 7abebd7..92931f8 100644
> --- a/security/commoncap.c
> +++ b/security/commoncap.c
> @@ -302,8 +302,7 @@ static inline void bprm_clear_caps(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>   * affects the security markings on that inode, and if it is, should
>   * inode_killpriv() be invoked or the change rejected?

How about dropping the question mark at the end of this sentence while you're
touching it?

>   *
> - * Returns 0 if granted; +ve if granted, but inode_killpriv() is required; and
> - * -ve to deny the change.
> + * Returns 1 if security.capability has a value, 0 otherwise.

Can you say a few more words, something like

 * Returns 1 if security.capability has a value, meaning inode_killpriv()
 * is required.  Else return 0, meaning inode_killpriv() is not required.

thanks,
-serge

>   */
>  int cap_inode_need_killpriv(struct dentry *dentry)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.7.4