linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] [GIT PULL] tracing: updates for 2.6.37

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1287194609.16971.37.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Oct 2010 22:03:29 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] [GIT PULL] tracing: updates for 2.6.37

On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 17:46 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 11:59:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 10:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > hm, i'm getting:
> > > 
> > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c: Assembler messages:
> > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:674: Error: symbol `ftrace_test_jmp' is already defined
> > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:678: Error: symbol `ftrace_test_p6nop' is already defined
> > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:680: Error: symbol `ftrace_test_nop5' is already defined
> > > 
> > > Config attached.
> > 
> > I'll see if I can get to this early next week. I'll be leaving to NYC on
> > Monday for the End Users Summit. I'll try to look at this while there.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > -- Steve
> > 
> 
> just saw this...looks like this is broken for gcc < 4.5. Anyways, the
> patch below fixes the compilation by making arch_init_ideal_nop5()
> static (and moving its definition ahead of its usage). I'm not quite
> sure why this makes the compiler happy...applies on top of this series.
> 

I can't reproduce this. And I don't like patches that have comments
like: "not quite sure why this makes the compiler happy".

Is this still an issue?  I tried out gcc 4.4.2, 4.4.4 and gcc 4.5.1 with
the config given, and did not get the above errors.

-- Steve


--
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/