[PATCH 1/2] capability: export has_capability
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
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
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
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