Re: [PATCH V3 04/10] capabilities: use root_priveleged inline to clarify logic
Quoting Richard Guy Briggs (rgb(a)redhat.com):
On 2017-08-25 15:58, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
>
> > Introduce inline root_privileged() to make use of SECURE_NONROOT
> > easier to read.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Serge Hallyn <serge(a)hallyn.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb(a)redhat.com>
> > ---
> > security/commoncap.c | 9 +++++----
> > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Acked-by: James Morris <james.l.morris(a)oracle.com>
Does anyone have the appetite to move this helper function to
include/linux/securebits.h along with issecure() to make it more widely
available?
If it's going to have wider scope, then it probably needs to be
renamed to be unambiguous in any context. root_implies_privilege
or uid0_is_privileged maybe? Maybe root_privileged() is ok...