linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] samples/kobject: add is

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: <2025081931-deprive-overtime-b353@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:24:04 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] samples/kobject: add is_visible() callback to
 attribute group

On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 11:14:31AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> There was no example for the is_visible() callback so far.
> 
> It will also become an example and test for the constification of
> 'struct attribute' later.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
> ---
>  samples/kobject/kset-example.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/samples/kobject/kset-example.c b/samples/kobject/kset-example.c
> index 579ce150217c6e613887e32a08206573543b3091..1aac595ed9498b30448485a60d9376cb5b5ea1d3 100644
> --- a/samples/kobject/kset-example.c
> +++ b/samples/kobject/kset-example.c
> @@ -178,7 +178,22 @@ static struct attribute *foo_default_attrs[] = {
>  	&bar_attribute.attr,
>  	NULL,	/* need to NULL terminate the list of attributes */
>  };
> -ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(foo_default);
> +
> +static umode_t foo_default_attrs_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj,
> +					    struct attribute *attr,
> +					    int n)
> +{
> +	/* Hide attributes with the same name as the kobject. */
> +	if (strcmp(kobject_name(kobj), attr->name) == 0)
> +		return 0;
> +	return attr->mode;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct attribute_group foo_default_group = {
> +	.attrs		= foo_default_attrs,
> +	.is_visible	= foo_default_attrs_is_visible,
> +};
> +__ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(foo_default);

Wait, why?  Shouldn't ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS() still work here?  No one should
have to call __ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS() in their code, that's just going to be
too messy over time.

thanks

greg k-h