linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] -mm/linux-next: procfs: Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps

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=VYLpUzuom-HUS-LYSuQmMZSRvC_Qjgyy9hnKqBowh-95YPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 25 Mar 2012 14:05:37 -0400
From:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To:	Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] -mm/linux-next: procfs: Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar
<siddhesh.poyarekar@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 23:04:36 +0530
>> Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Following is the updated patch with requested changes incorporated.
>>
>> Boy, that's a lot of changes (below).  What does it all do?
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Since this patch was included in the -mm tree on March 14th, I assumed
> that linux-next would get the patch in today's merge, but it hasn't.
> Is there something I am missing? Does the patch need additional
> review/acks that I need to request for?

Hi Siddhesh,

It looks like this still fails.   The original failure was:

super.c:(.text+0x3ffd8): undefined reference to `vm_is_stack'

Now it is:

mm/nommu.o: In function `vm_is_stack':
nommu.c:(.text+0x2178): multiple definition of `vm_is_stack'
mm/util.o:util.c:(.text+0x2bc): first defined here
make[2]: *** [mm/built-in.o] Error 1

http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/5941188/

Can you include in your testing for v3, the ARM at91x40_defconfig please?

Thanks,
Paul.

>
> Thanks,
> Siddhesh
>
> Thanks,
> Siddhesh
>
>
> --
> Siddhesh Poyarekar
> http://siddhesh.in
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
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/