linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: sparc tree build failure

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]

Date:	Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:28:16 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: linux-next: sparc tree build failure

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:16:07 +1100

> Today's linux-next build (sparc32 defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c: In function '__atomic_add_return':
> arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c:34: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_spin_lock_irqsave'
> arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c:38: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore'
> 
> Caused by commit 4df286e52917c95c415400367cfd523dfbb0f93a ("sparc: Make
> atomic locks raw") which I have reverted for today.

Ho hum, that's the second iteration and it broke the build first time
too.

__raw_spin_lock_irqsave() definitions don't exist anywhere in the
tree, I wonder what this was even build tested against?

I'm reverting, and I'll be hard pressed to add new versions without
solid proof that it doesn't break the build a third time :-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/