Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1556839 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-11 19:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-01-12 07:50 +0100 |
| Articles | 3 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> - 2017-01-11 19:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com> - 2017-01-12 02:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com> - 2017-01-12 07:50 +0100
| From | Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-11 19:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability |
| Message-ID | <sYw8a-1XP-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com> wrote:
> has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
> for specified task other than current, so export it.
>
> Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> Cc: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com>
> ---
> kernel/capability.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/capability.c b/kernel/capability.c
> index 4984e1f..e2e198c 100644
> --- a/kernel/capability.c
> +++ b/kernel/capability.c
> @@ -318,6 +318,7 @@ bool has_capability(struct task_struct *t, int cap)
> {
> return has_ns_capability(t, &init_user_ns, cap);
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(has_capability);
>
> /**
> * has_ns_capability_noaudit - Does a task have a capability (unaudited)
Are we using EXPORT_SYMBOL vs EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL here to match the other
exports in this file? We could use _GPL to match the expected caller
of this.
Serge,
Do you have any comments on this patch? I'd be happy to pull it
through the vfio tree with an appropriate Ack. Thanks,
Alex
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 02:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sYBUe-5BX-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1556839 |
On 01/12/2017 02:47 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
> Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
>> for specified task other than current, so export it.
>>
>> Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/capability.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/capability.c b/kernel/capability.c
>> index 4984e1f..e2e198c 100644
>> --- a/kernel/capability.c
>> +++ b/kernel/capability.c
>> @@ -318,6 +318,7 @@ bool has_capability(struct task_struct *t, int cap)
>> {
>> return has_ns_capability(t, &init_user_ns, cap);
>> }
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(has_capability);
>>
>> /**
>> * has_ns_capability_noaudit - Does a task have a capability (unaudited)
>
> Are we using EXPORT_SYMBOL vs EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL here to match the other
> exports in this file? We could use _GPL to match the expected caller
> of this.
>
Yes, I chose EXPORT_SYMBOL to match the existing exports in capability.c.
Either is good to me, of course :)
>
> Serge,
>
> Do you have any comments on this patch? I'd be happy to pull it
> through the vfio tree with an appropriate Ack. Thanks,
Guess Serge still on Xmas vocation? :)
--
Thanks,
Jike
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-12 07:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sYHmV-FU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1556839 |
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 01:47:01PM -0500, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
> Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
> > for specified task other than current, so export it.
> >
> > Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jike Song <jike.song@intel.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/capability.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/capability.c b/kernel/capability.c
> > index 4984e1f..e2e198c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/capability.c
> > +++ b/kernel/capability.c
> > @@ -318,6 +318,7 @@ bool has_capability(struct task_struct *t, int cap)
> > {
> > return has_ns_capability(t, &init_user_ns, cap);
> > }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(has_capability);
> >
> > /**
> > * has_ns_capability_noaudit - Does a task have a capability (unaudited)
>
> Are we using EXPORT_SYMBOL vs EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL here to match the other
> exports in this file? We could use _GPL to match the expected caller
> of this.
>
>
> Serge,
>
> Do you have any comments on this patch? I'd be happy to pull it
> through the vfio tree with an appropriate Ack. Thanks,
Sure, thanks, looks good to me.
Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web