linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] EFI urgent fixes

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: <1411732755.7866.24.camel@x220>
Date:	Fri, 26 Sep 2014 13:59:15 +0200
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EFI urgent fixes

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 12:44 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Sep, at 01:27:34PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > 
> > This Makefile was changed in the first patch. That became 84be880560fb
> > ("Revert "efi/x86: efistub: Move shared dependencies to <asm/efi.h>""),
> > which just landed in next-20140926.
> > 
> > It appears to have introduced a typo, because:
> >     CONFIG_EFI_ARM_STUB
> > 
> > should probably have been:
> >     CONFIG_EFI_ARMSTUB
> 
> Crap. Thanks for catching that Paul. I'm wondering how this slipped
> through because that commit has an explicit Tested-by from Leif.
> 
> Hell, even I built an arm64 EFI kernel before sending that commit.
> 
> Ohh.. I see why no one caught this. From arch/arm64/Makefile,
> 
>   libs-$(CONFIG_EFI_STUB) += drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/
> 
> so libstub will be built for arm64 regardless of the broken logic in
> drivers/firmware/efi/Makefile.
> 
> Paul, how did you notice the typo? Did you hit an explicit build
> failure? It's definitely wrong and I'm trying to figure out whether I
> need to add some more testing to my build infrastructure to catch this
> kind of problem in the future.

I have a 800 line perl monster that checks for stuff like this. It's not
very sophisticated but smart enough to spot typos like this one. I try
to have it check each linux-next (and mainline) release.

(I think Valentin Rothberg is trying to automate this properly. See
http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2014/ocw/sessions/1863 .)

> The next question is: should we fix this up at this point in the merge
> cycle? It's basically just dead code.


Paul Bolle

--
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/