Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] seccomp: Fix documentation | From | Mickaël Salaün <> | Date | Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:31:47 +0200 |
| |
Could someone push this please?
On 20/09/2016 19:39, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > Fix struct seccomp_filter and seccomp_run_filters() signatures. > > Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> > Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > Cc: Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org> > --- > kernel/seccomp.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c > index 0db7c8a2afe2..494cba230ca0 100644 > --- a/kernel/seccomp.c > +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c > @@ -41,8 +41,7 @@ > * outside of a lifetime-guarded section. In general, this > * is only needed for handling filters shared across tasks. > * @prev: points to a previously installed, or inherited, filter > - * @len: the number of instructions in the program > - * @insnsi: the BPF program instructions to evaluate > + * @prog: the BPF program to evaluate > * > * seccomp_filter objects are organized in a tree linked via the @prev > * pointer. For any task, it appears to be a singly-linked list starting > @@ -168,8 +167,8 @@ static int seccomp_check_filter(struct sock_filter *filter, unsigned int flen) > } > > /** > - * seccomp_run_filters - evaluates all seccomp filters against @syscall > - * @syscall: number of the current system call > + * seccomp_run_filters - evaluates all seccomp filters against @sd > + * @sd: optional seccomp data to be passed to filters > * > * Returns valid seccomp BPF response codes. > */ >
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] |  |