linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (driver-core tree related)

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]

Message-Id: <201009140922.51566.trenn@suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:22:51 +0200
From:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the final tree (driver-core tree related)

On Monday 13 September 2010 22:57:12 Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:26:13PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > On Monday 13 September 2010 17:51:55 Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Sep 2010 19:34:04 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 11:54:26AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > > 
> > > > > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > > > > allnoconfig) produced this warning:
> > > > > 
> > > > > kernel/params.c: In function 'parse_args':
> > > > > kernel/params.c:233: warning: the frame size of 1032 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes
> > > > > 
> > > > > Introduced by commit 32e6407e9361cd1aac39ff6b744cad48d1802a08 ("Dynamic
> > > > > Debug: Introduce global fake module param module.ddebug") which added a
> > > > > 1024 byte array to the stack ...
> > > > 
> > > > Wierd, why didn't this show up yesterday?  The patch was in that tree
> > > > then, right?
> > > > 
> > > > Thomas, care to fix this up?
> > >  
> > > ping.  Is Thomas around??
> > Yep, sorry for not responding.
> > 
> > I tried to reproduce this on ppc64, but above file compiled without
> > warning with dynamic debug set. Thus I thought this still came from the
> > old patch.
> > 
> > I have another solution for that, please drop above patch.
> > Jason pointed out that kernel boot params for compiled-in modules are
> > not recognized correctly. I fiddled with that for quite some time last week...
> > 
> > I should be able to send something tomorrow.
> > I will include lkml as it touches several files, would be great if Greg
> > can pick them up again if feedback is positive.
> 
> Ok, which exact patch do you want me to drop, the "Introduce global fake
> module param..." one?
Yes, please.

Thanks,

       Thomas
--
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/