linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (sparc, ptrace trees 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]

Date:	Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:54:59 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	matt.fleming@...el.com, tj@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree
 (sparc, ptrace trees related)

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:07:14 +1100

> After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (sparc64 defconfig)
> failed like this:
> 
> arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c: In function 'handle_signal':
> arch/sparc/kernel/signal_64.c:482:11: error: unused variable 'blocked' [-Werror=unused-variable]
> 
> Caused by my merge of commits faddf598f0ba ("sparc: Use
> set_current_blocked()") form the sparc tree and 383fe35697e4 ("sparc: Use
> set_current_blocked() and block_sigmask()") from the ptrace tree.
> 
> I have added the following merge fix patch for today.

They didn't build test the original version of the signal patches I
put into the sparc tree either, which is why I fixed them up and put
them into the sparc GIT tree.

Ptrace folks can we not operate like this?  The only reason I found
out about the set_current_blocked() transformations was by accident,
because the original patch was posted to linux-kernel only so it never
got queued up into sparc patchwork.

Then once Oleg mentioned it to me, it didn't even compile so I fixed
it up and put the fixed up copy into my tree.  It also didn't
transform the TS_RESTORE_SIGMASK cases in the sparc signal code, so I
also added a patch to the sparc tree which took care of that.

Now you guys are creating conflicts against those fixed up patches in
another non-sparc tree, and adding new kinds of build failures as
well.

This doesn't work.
--
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/