linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/kaiser: avoid 32-bit/PAE build warning

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, 15 Feb 2018 17:43:43 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/kaiser: avoid 32-bit/PAE build warning

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 04:37:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:43 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:12:24PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> I also saw another warning:
> >>
> >> /git/arm-soc/arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c: In function 'kaiser_init':
> >> /git/arm-soc/arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c:347:8: error: 'vsyscall_pgprot'
> >> undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean
> >> 'massage_pgprot'?
> >>
> >> I can send this as proper patches for inclusion in 4.9-stable, unless
> >> someone has a better idea or finds a problem
> >
> > proper patches would be good :)
> 
> Sent two patches now. I want to make sure I haven't missed anything there,
> especially as my first approach at fixing it ended up causing other build
> failures.
> 
> In order to test this, I backported some 35 other (mostly trivial) patches later
> kernels, and now I have a 4.9.80 based tree that produces a clean randconfig
> build every time on arm64 and x86_64. If you want, I'll send you the list
> of the required backports as well. From what I can tell, they are all
> harmless (unused functions, missing Kconfig dependencies etc), but
> being able to do randconfig builds reliable gives us an additional tool for
> regression testing the stable kernels.

Sure, I'll be glad to take those.

> For 4.14-stable, we only need a handful of patches, but only one of those
> is upstream, I'll try my best to get the others merged with a Cc stable tag
> so 4.14 randconfig should build cleanly soon.

Again, I'll be glad to take them as well.

> I suspect 4.4 would require even more patches, but I have not looked.

If the above doesn't clean up 4.4 as well, that would be surprising :)

Anyway, 4.4 might be nice to have "clean" if possible, and it's not too
much trouble.

thanks,

greg k-h