linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

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: <52DC76B8.7050808@zytor.com>
Date:	Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:07:04 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On 01/19/2014 05:00 PM, Len Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
>> failed like this:
>>
>> arch/x86/kernel/process.c: In function 'mwait_idle':
>> /scratch/sfr/next/arch/x86/kernel/process.c:434:3: error: implicit declaration of function '__monitor' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    __monitor((void *)&current_thread_info()->flags, 0, 0);
>>    ^
>> arch/x86/kernel/process.c:437:4: error: implicit declaration of function '__sti_mwait' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>     __sti_mwait(0, 0);
>>     ^
>>
>> Caused by commit 16824255394f ("x86, acpi, idle: Restructure the mwait
>> idle routines") interacting with commit 7760518cce95 ("x86 idle: restore
>> mwait_idle()") from the idle tree.
>>
>> I am not sure how to fix this so I just reverted the idle tree commit for
>> now (since it reverted cleanly). Please let me know if there is a better
>> solution.
> 
> IMO, a regression fix (restore mwait_idle()) is more important than a clean up
> (restructure mwait routines), and the clean-up should take a back seat;
> in -tip, in -next, upstream, and in -stable.
> 
> Also, I'm wondering if that clean-up went too far -- as not all users of mwait
> are necessarily under the same conditions...
> 

Sounds like a NAK to me, in which case that bit should probably be
deferred and reintroduced after fixing via the idle tree?

	-hpa


--
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/