[PATCH 22/58] Audit: Change audit_sig_sid to audit_sig_lsm

[Kees Cook]

On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 12:17:42PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 6/6/2019 11:41 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 03:23:07PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> >> Maybe lsm_export_is_interesting()?
> >> I'd love to discover there's a convention I could adhere to.
> > I'd agree "lsm_data" seems meaningless. lsm_export does seem a better
> > name, though it has the "export is also a verb" issue. Would "lsm_context"
> > or "lsm_ctx"?
> > be better?
> >
> > then we get lsm_ctx_is_interesting() and lsm_ctx_to_secid() ?
> 
> Fiddling around with this led me to think "struct lsmdata"
> would work, although maybe "struct lsmblob", in keeping with
> the notion it is opaque. Leaving out the "_" helps with the
> verb issue, I think. I think ctx or context is right out, as
> secctx is the string representation, and it would really confuse
> things.

Ah yeah, good point on "context". Does "blob" conflict with the existing
"blob" stuff? If it's always going to be u32 data, do we want it to be
lsm_u32 ? Or, since it's a multiplexor, lsmmux ?


-- 
Kees Cook