Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] syslog: distinguish between /proc/kmsg and syscalls

[Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 15:31 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting James Morris (jmorris@namei.org):
> > On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Kees Cook wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Alex,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 08:58:43AM +0100, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > > > > +       /* /proc/kmsg can open be opened by CAP_SYS_ADMIN */
> > > > > +       if (type != 1 && from_file)
> > > > > +               return 0;
> > > > 
> > > > "can open be opened"?
> > > 
> > > Erk, sorry.  s/open //
> > > 
> > > James, do you want a patch for that?
> > 
> > I guess... and 'opened with' might be better.
> 
> I'd still as mentioned yesterday prefer "requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN to open"
> Otherwise, every time I see the comment I expect stricter requirements,
> not laxer ones, on the other actions.  However, I think with the second
> patch switching 1 for a meaningful name, the comment isn't even necessary
> or noticable any more.

Agreed, the names make the function understandable, the comment confused
the mess out of me.