On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 09:09:49AM -0500, Edwin Zimmerman wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h > > > index cb93972257be..5d6428d0027b 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h > > > @@ -304,8 +304,7 @@ > > > * Return 0 if permission is granted. > > > * @path_chmod: > > > * Check for permission to change DAC's permission of a file or > > > directory. > > > - * @dentry contains the dentry structure. > > > - * @mnt contains the vfsmnt structure. > > > + * @path contains the path structure. > > > > May I politely inquire about the value of these comments? How much > > information > > is provided by refering to an argument as "the dentry structure" or "the > > path > > structure", especially when there's nothing immediately above that would > > introduce > > either. "Type of 'dentry' argument is somehow related to struct dentry, > > try and guess what the value might be - we don't care, we just need every > > argument commented"? > > > > Who needs that crap in the first place? > > The comments fill a valuable place to folks like me who are new to the linux > security modules. > In my spare time, I'm writing a new LSM specifically geared for parental > controls uses, and the > comments in lsm_hooks.h have helped me out more than once. Perhaps the > comments could > be inproved by changing them to something like this: > "@[arg] contains the [type] structure, defined in linux/[?].h"
Um... The _type_ of argument is visible in declaration already; it doesn't say a damn thing about the value of that argument. In this particular case, dentry/mnt pair (whichever way it gets passed; struct path is exactly such a pair) is actually used to specify the location of file or directory in question, but try to guess that by description given in this "documentation"... As for "defined in"... that's what grep/ctags/etc. are for. Again, the useful information about an argument is _what_ gets passed in it, not just which type it is...
