linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 2/3] mm/mempolicy: export memory policy symbols

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <469ee330-7736-4059-9e59-ec7b9a6d3c8b@suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 12:52:39 +0100
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 willy@...radead.org, pbonzini@...hat.com
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, chao.gao@...el.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
 ackerleytng@...gle.com, david@...hat.com, bharata@....com, nikunj@....com,
 michael.day@....com, Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
 michael.roth@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 2/3] mm/mempolicy: export memory policy symbols

On 2/10/25 07:32, Shivank Garg wrote:
> Export memory policy related symbols needed by the KVM guest-memfd to
> implement NUMA policy support.
> 
> These symbols are required to implement per-memory region NUMA policies
> for guest memory, allowing VMMs to control guest memory placement across
> NUMA nodes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shivank Garg <shivankg@....com>

I think we should use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() these days.

Wasn't there also some way to limit the exports to KVM?

> ---
>  mm/mempolicy.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index bbaadbeeb291..9c15780cfa63 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -214,6 +214,7 @@ struct mempolicy *get_task_policy(struct task_struct *p)
>  
>  	return &default_policy;
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_task_policy);
>  
>  static const struct mempolicy_operations {
>  	int (*create)(struct mempolicy *pol, const nodemask_t *nodes);
> @@ -347,6 +348,7 @@ void __mpol_put(struct mempolicy *pol)
>  		return;
>  	kmem_cache_free(policy_cache, pol);
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__mpol_put);
>  
>  static void mpol_rebind_default(struct mempolicy *pol, const nodemask_t *nodes)
>  {
> @@ -2736,6 +2738,7 @@ struct mempolicy *mpol_shared_policy_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp,
>  	read_unlock(&sp->lock);
>  	return pol;
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mpol_shared_policy_lookup);
>  
>  static void sp_free(struct sp_node *n)
>  {
> @@ -3021,6 +3024,7 @@ void mpol_shared_policy_init(struct shared_policy *sp, struct mempolicy *mpol)
>  		mpol_put(mpol);	/* drop our incoming ref on sb mpol */
>  	}
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mpol_shared_policy_init);
>  
>  int mpol_set_shared_policy(struct shared_policy *sp,
>  			struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mempolicy *pol)
> @@ -3039,6 +3043,7 @@ int mpol_set_shared_policy(struct shared_policy *sp,
>  		sp_free(new);
>  	return err;
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mpol_set_shared_policy);
>  
>  /* Free a backing policy store on inode delete. */
>  void mpol_free_shared_policy(struct shared_policy *sp)
> @@ -3057,6 +3062,7 @@ void mpol_free_shared_policy(struct shared_policy *sp)
>  	}
>  	write_unlock(&sp->lock);
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mpol_free_shared_policy);
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
>  static int __initdata numabalancing_override;