|
From: Mimi Z. <zo...@li...> - 2015-04-07 13:23:14
|
On Tue, 2015-04-07 at 12:22 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> It's a bit easier to read this if we split it up into two for loops.
Agreed
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan...@or...>
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zo...@li...>
Mimi
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index d1eefb9..e86b58d 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -338,16 +338,12 @@ void __init ima_init_policy(void)
> appraise_entries = ima_use_appraise_tcb ?
> ARRAY_SIZE(default_appraise_rules) : 0;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < measure_entries + appraise_entries; i++) {
> - if (i < measure_entries)
> - list_add_tail(&default_rules[i].list,
> - &ima_default_rules);
> - else {
> - int j = i - measure_entries;
> -
> - list_add_tail(&default_appraise_rules[j].list,
> - &ima_default_rules);
> - }
> + for (i = 0; i < measure_entries; i++)
> + list_add_tail(&default_rules[i].list, &ima_default_rules);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < appraise_entries; i++) {
> + list_add_tail(&default_appraise_rules[i].list,
> + &ima_default_rules);
> }
>
> ima_rules = &ima_default_rules;
|