linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: export block_class and disk

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 2 May 2021 23:37:35 -0300
From:   Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@...e.de>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: export block_class and disk_type symbols

On 05/01, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 03:32:10PM -0300, Enzo Matsumiya wrote:
>> Export symbols to be used by _for_each_blk() helper in LED block
>> trigger.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@...e.de>
>> ---
>>  block/genhd.c | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/genhd.c b/block/genhd.c
>> index 8c8f543572e6..516495179230 100644
>> --- a/block/genhd.c
>> +++ b/block/genhd.c
>> @@ -1218,6 +1218,7 @@ static void disk_release(struct device *dev)
>>  struct class block_class = {
>>  	.name		= "block",
>>  };
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(block_class);
>>
>>  static char *block_devnode(struct device *dev, umode_t *mode,
>>  			   kuid_t *uid, kgid_t *gid)
>> @@ -1235,6 +1236,7 @@ const struct device_type disk_type = {
>>  	.release	= disk_release,
>>  	.devnode	= block_devnode,
>>  };
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(disk_type);
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
>>  /*
>
>Please please no.  These should not be needed by anything.
>
>And if they really do, they must be EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL().
>
>thanks,
>
>greg k-h

Thanks. I was indeed skeptical about submitting this particular change.

Do you think it's more acceptable if I implement a for_each_blk() helper
(cf. patch 2 on this series) on block code?

I couldn't find any other way to do this (get all block devices on the
system), so please let me know if I missed something.


Cheers,

Enzo