| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49BEDC75.1080704@snapgear.com> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:10:45 +1000 From: Greg Ungerer <gerg@...pgear.com> To: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> CC: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dwmw2@...radead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org Subject: Re: make headers_install broken for ARCH=m68k in 2.6.29-rc7. Hi Rob, Rob Landley wrote: > On Monday 16 March 2009 07:40:19 Greg Ungerer wrote: >> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:52, Greg Ungerer <gerg@...pgear.com> wrote: >>>> Sam Ravnborg wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:33:18AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:25, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 05:04:57PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: >>>>>>>> I pretty quick time I can fix up the last couple on the above list. >>>>>>>> But do we want to put all that change into 2.6.29-rc at this point? >>>>>>> In general we do not want to have headers_check broken in mainline, >>>>>> headers_check is not broken, headers_install is. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmm, in some sense headers_check _is_ broken, as it doesn't notice >>>>>> headers_install >>>>>> installs headers that refer to other headers that are not installed... >>>>> This is what scripts/headers_check are supposed to do - strange. >>>>> >>>>>> Greg, I had a quick look at your signcontext.h and signal.h merge, and >>>>>> the MMU >>>>>> part seems to be OK. >>>>>> >>>>>> However, some of the installed headers still have checks for >>>>>> CONFIG_MMU: >>>>>> >>>>>> param.h:#ifdef CONFIG_MMU >>>>>> sigcontext.h:#ifndef CONFIG_MMU >>>>>> sigcontext.h:#ifdef CONFIG_MMU >>>>>> siginfo.h:#ifdef CONFIG_MMU >>>>>> siginfo.h:#ifdef CONFIG_MMU >>>>>> siginfo.h:#endif /* CONFIG_MMU */ >>>>>> swab.h:#elif defined(CONFIG_MMU) >>>>>> >>>>>> so these have to be added to the generic unifdef-y list (is that >>>>>> include/asm-generic/Kbuild.asm?). >>>> Hmmm, yes your right. >>>> >>>>> include/asm-generic/Kbuild.asm impacts all architectures so be carefull >>>>> there. >>>>> It looks like some updates to arch/m68k/include/asm/Kbuild is needed, >>>>> and not the generic list of files to export. >>>>> >>>>> Also use og CONFIG_MMU suprises me. >>>>> We used #ifdef __uClinux__ in the non-merged headers to avoid use >>>>> of a CONFIG_* symbol that is not valid outside the kernel namespace. >>>>> So if param.h in m68k uses CONFIG_MMU it is broken. >>>> I have been trying to use CONFIG_MMU wherever possible (so for non- >>>> exported headers), since that matches what is actually in the code >>>> proper. I am concerned at the longer term use of __uClinux__ for >>>> distinguishing MMU and non-MMU. I plan on switching to use a normal >>>> m68k toolchain soon. And it won't define __uClinux__ on its own. >>>> (I already do this on ARM for example - same toolchain on both >>>> MMU an non-MMU). >>>> >>>> What I have done so far is or the most part a very simple merge >>>> of the files. I know there is room for some improvements in quite a >>>> few of these files. >>>> >>>> The use of CONFIG_MMU in swab.h (is this actually exported to user >>>> space?) is not actually for code that is MMU or non-MMU. It is >>>> actually architecture specific. Most ColdFire parts don't have the >>>> "rolw" instruction. The condition test can be better. Geert, any >>>> ideas on what is more appropriate here? >>> The `rolw' variant is already protected by `#if defined >>> (__mcfisaaplus__) || defined (__mcfisac__)', >>> so I think you can replace the `#elif defined(CONFIG_MMU)' by a plain >>> `#else'. Or are there cases where you don't want to have __arch_swab32 at >>> all? >> Not all ColdFire fit into '(__mcfisaaplus__) || defined (__mcfisac__)' >> so #else won't be good enough. Though I suspect it is true that the >> older m68k varients (68328, etc) can do "rolw" - or I am I mistaken on >> that? >> >>>> I can switch back to using __uClinux__ on siginfo.h and sigcontext.h. >>>> If I am not mistaken we can't change these structures without breaking >>>> backwards compatibility? The sigcontext change is particularly ugly :-( >>> Copying the signal experts on linux-m68k... >>> >>>> Similarly for param.h, it looks like a switch back to using >>>> __uClinux__ for now is the only option. >>>> >>>> Now after these fixups should I create a git branch with these header >>>> merges in for inclusion into 2.6.29-rc? To fix the regression we >>>> only need to do the handful of files that Rob listed, right? >>> Yes. >> Ok, I have created a git branch for this as: >> >> The following changes since commit >> 5bee17f18b595937e6beafeee5197868a3f74a06: Kyle McMartin (1): >> parisc: sba_iommu: fix build bug when CONFIG_PARISC_AGP=y >> >> are available in the git repository at: >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gerg/m68knommu.git >> fix-includes >> >> Greg Ungerer (8): >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of param.h >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of swab.h >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of sigcontext.h >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of siginfo.h >> m68k: use MMU version of setup.h for both MMU and non-MMU >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of ptrace.h >> m68k: merge the non-MMU and MMU versions of signal.h >> m68k: use the MMU version of unistd.h for all m68k platforms >> >> arch/m68k/include/asm/param.h | 25 ++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/param_mm.h | 22 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/param_no.h | 22 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h | 88 ++++++++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace_mm.h | 80 ------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace_no.h | 87 -------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/setup.h | 377 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/setup_mm.h | 376 >> -------------------------------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/setup_no.h | 10 - >> arch/m68k/include/asm/sigcontext.h | 25 ++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/sigcontext_mm.h | 19 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/sigcontext_no.h | 17 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/siginfo.h | 95 ++++++++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/siginfo_mm.h | 92 -------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/siginfo_no.h | 6 - >> arch/m68k/include/asm/signal.h | 216 ++++++++++++++++++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/signal_mm.h | 206 ------------------ >> arch/m68k/include/asm/signal_no.h | 159 -------------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/swab.h | 30 +++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/swab_mm.h | 16 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/swab_no.h | 24 -- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/unistd.h | 377 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/unistd_mm.h | 372 >> -------------------------------- >> arch/m68k/include/asm/unistd_no.h | 372 >> -------------------------------- >> 24 files changed, 1206 insertions(+), 1907 deletions(-) >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/param_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/param_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/setup_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/setup_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/sigcontext_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/sigcontext_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/siginfo_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/siginfo_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/signal_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/signal_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/swab_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/swab_no.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/unistd_mm.h >> delete mode 100644 arch/m68k/include/asm/unistd_no.h >> >> >> I have only patched those files that I saw mentioned in the previous >> emails in this thread. >> >> Geert, can you check an m68k build? >> Rob, can you check that you can build what you used to be able to? > > Nope. Pulled the repository, tarred it up, stuck it in my build system, and > the uClibc build still dies attempting to generate syscalls: > > GEN include/bits/sysnum.h > In file included from <stdin>:1: > /home/landley/firmware/firmware/build/cross-compiler- > m68k/include/asm/unistd.h:4:23: error: unistd_mm.h: No such file or directory > In file included from <stdin>:1: > /home/landley/firmware/firmware/build/cross-compiler- > m68k/include/asm/unistd.h:4:23: error: unistd_mm.h: No such file or directory > ERROR: Could not generate syscalls. Did you get the "fix-includes" branch? There is no reference to unistd_mm.h in that branch... Regards Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@...pgear.com SnapGear, a McAfee Company PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 825 Stanley St, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630 Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists