lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] CAPABILITIES: add cap_isequal helper
Date
On Monday, March 09, 2015 09:35:46 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Can be used to determine whether two given sets have the same
> capabilities.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com>
> ---
> include/linux/capability.h | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/capability.h b/include/linux/capability.h
> index af9f0b9..2fcf941 100644
> --- a/include/linux/capability.h
> +++ b/include/linux/capability.h
> @@ -155,6 +155,16 @@ static inline int cap_isclear(const kernel_cap_t a)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +static inline int cap_isequal(const kernel_cap_t a, const kernel_cap_t b)
> +{
> + unsigned __capi;
> + CAP_FOR_EACH_U32(__capi) {
> + if (a.cap[__capi] != b.cap[__capi])
> + return 0;
> + }
> + return 1;
> +}

I realize it is currently only a two pass loop so probably not that big of a
deal, but couldn't you accomplish the same with a memcmp()? I suppose the
above implementation might be faster than those architectures which use the
generic memcmp() implementation, but I wonder if the arch-specific memcmp()
implementations would be faster.

Also, what is the main motivation for this patchset? Do you have a workload
that is being hit hard by prepare_creds()?

--
paul moore
security @ redhat



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-13 15:21    [W:0.046 / U:5.904 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site