linux-kernel - Re: Circular dependency between <linux/kernel.h> and <asm/bug.h> on ARM

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: <CAP=VYLpP393c0MYxPPR2j6jkLyyUQWjQBWg3RfbpJyuWxi+psA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Jan 2012 22:43:56 -0500
From:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Circular dependency between <linux/kernel.h> and <asm/bug.h> on ARM

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 11:01:27PM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> wrote:
>> > Commit 87e040b6456fd3416a1f6831c1eedaef5c0a94ff ("ARM: 7017/1: Use
>> > generic BUG() handler") makes BUG() use BUILD_BUG_ON().  However,
>> > BUILD_BUG_ON() is not defined in <linux/bug.h> but in <linux/kernel.h>.
>> >
>> > arch/include/asm/bug.h does not include <linux/kernel.h> and *cannot* do
>> > so because the latter already includes <asm/bug.h>.
>>
>> Sure it can, but it's not ideal. Since the BUILD_BUG_ON is only used
>> in bug.h in a #define, it will be resolved below the includes of
>> either so there should be no ordering issue between the two.
>
> I disagree - we should not be creating circular dependencies.  This
> creates a mess, and uncertain results.  For instance, if we include
> linux/bug.h or asm/bug.h before linux/kernel.h has been included,
> then we end up with linux/kernel.h being parsed without a definition
> for BUG_ON().
>
> However, if linux/kernel.h is included first, we start parsing that,
> include asm/bug.h, asm/bug.h then includes linux/kernel.h which produces
> an empty file, and then we continue parsing asm/bug.h _without_
> BUILD_BUG_ON() defined.
>
> So, adding linux/kernel.h does _not_ solve the problem.  It solves the
> problem for _some_ cases only.
>
>> > Maybe BUILD_BUG_ON() should be moved out to a header of its own, or else
>> > this particular use should be moved to some other file.  This needs to
>> > be fixed somehow, as it obviously leads to build failures, e.g.:
>> >
>> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=linux-2.6&arch=armel&ver=3.2~rc7-1~experimental.1&stamp=1325142904
>>
>> Or perhaps moving BUILD_BUG_ON to include/linux/bug.h?
>
> and change linux/kernel.h to include linux/bug.h rather than asm/bug.h.

Actually, kernel.h doesn't need to include any variant of bug.h at all.

I started on cleaning this up a few weeks back, but didn't have the time
to get it ready for 3.3 -- so my intent is to do so for linux-next that will
be the 3.4 release.  The Work In Progress can be seen here:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/paulg/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/bug.h-cleanup-WIP

I only mention it here since I'd hate to see anyone waste time on
duplicating work that is already done.

Thanks,
Paul.

---

>
>> The quickest fix for now might be to take out the BUILD_BUG_ON(),
>> especially so close to 3.2-final.
>
> I think just remove the BUILD_BUG_ON.  Other architectures have done
> without it, so I see no reason we can't do as well.
> --
> 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/
--
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/