linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: asm/tlb.h: Fix build error implicit func declaration

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:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 12:09:53 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Cc:     riel@...riel.com, peterz@...radead.org, songliubraving@...com,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, dave.hansen@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: asm/tlb.h: Fix build error implicit func declaration


* Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org> wrote:

> Building on arm 32 with LPAE enabled we don't include asm-generic/tlb.h,
> where we have tlb_flush_remove_tables_local and tlb_flush_remove_tables
> defined.
> mm/memory.c: In function ‘tlb_remove_table_smp_sync’:
> mm/memory.c:339:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘tlb_flush_remove_tables_local’; did you mean ‘tlb_remove_table’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   tlb_flush_remove_tables_local(mm);
>   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   tlb_remove_table
> mm/memory.c: In function ‘tlb_table_flush’:
> mm/memory.c:372:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘tlb_flush_remove_tables’; did you mean ‘tlb_remove_table’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   tlb_flush_remove_tables(tlb->mm);
>   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   tlb_remove_table
> 
> To fix this issue we define them in arm 32's specific asm/tlb.h file.
> 
> Fixes: 2ff6ddf19c0e ("x86/mm/tlb: Leave lazy TLB mode at page table free time")
> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
> ---
> 
> Ingo, would it make sense for you to pick it up into the x86 tree since
> that contains the bug ?

Done and sorry about that! Will push your fix out to -next as well ASAP.

Thanks,

	Ingo