Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> writes:
> This is confusing as one 'action' variable is used for storing
> a SCMP_ enum value, while the other 'action' variable is used
> for storing a SECCOMP_ enum value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>
> ---
> softmmu/qemu-seccomp.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/softmmu/qemu-seccomp.c b/softmmu/qemu-seccomp.c
> index d66a2a1226..4d7439e7f7 100644
> --- a/softmmu/qemu-seccomp.c
> +++ b/softmmu/qemu-seccomp.c
> @@ -283,9 +283,9 @@ static uint32_t qemu_seccomp_update_action(uint32_t
> action)
> if (action == SCMP_ACT_TRAP) {
> static int kill_process = -1;
> if (kill_process == -1) {
> - uint32_t action = SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS;
> + uint32_t testaction = SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS;
>
> - if (qemu_seccomp(SECCOMP_GET_ACTION_AVAIL, 0, &action) == 0) {
> + if (qemu_seccomp(SECCOMP_GET_ACTION_AVAIL, 0, &testaction) == 0)
> {
> kill_process = 1;
> } else {
> kill_process = 0;
I'd prefer @test_action. Regardless:
Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
