[PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability

2016-12-21 Thread Jike Song 
has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
for specified task other than current, so export it.

Cc: Alex Williamson 
Cc: Kirti Wankhede 
Signed-off-by: Jike Song 
---
 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)
-- 
2.4.4.488.gdf97e5d

Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability

2017-01-11 Thread Alex Williamson 
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
Jike Song  wrote:

> has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
> for specified task other than current, so export it.
> 
> Cc: Alex Williamson 
> Cc: Kirti Wankhede 
> Signed-off-by: Jike Song 
> ---
>  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

Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability

2017-01-11 Thread Jike Song 
On 01/12/2017 02:47 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
> Jike Song  wrote:
> 
>> has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
>> for specified task other than current, so export it.
>>
>> Cc: Alex Williamson 
>> Cc: Kirti Wankhede 
>> Signed-off-by: Jike Song 
>> ---
>>  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

Re: [PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability

2017-01-11 Thread Serge E. Hallyn 
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 01:47:01PM -0500, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:10:15 +0800
> Jike Song  wrote:
> 
> > has_capability() is sometimes needed by modules to test capability
> > for specified task other than current, so export it.
> > 
> > Cc: Alex Williamson 
> > Cc: Kirti Wankhede 
> > Signed-off-by: Jike Song 
> > ---
> >  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