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]

Date:	Tue, 07 Apr 2015 21:54:05 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On 04/07/2015 06:18 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On 4/7/15 4:13 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> [ Cc'ing Dave, fyi ]
>>
>> On 04/07/2015 11:05 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:56:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann
>>> <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>>>> On 04/07/2015 10:48 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>>> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>>>>>> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> kernel/events/core.c: In function 'perf_event_set_bpf_prog':
>>>>>> kernel/events/core.c:6732:15: error: 'struct bpf_prog_aux' has no
>>>>>> member named 'prog_type'
>>>>>>     if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
>>>>>>                  ^
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Caused by commit 2541517c32be ("tracing, perf: Implement BPF programs
>>>>>> attached to kprobes").
>>>>>
>>>>> Note, this must be some (rarely triggered) aspect of the ppc64
>>>>> defconfig that neither x86 randconfigs nor most other arch defconfigs
>>>>> expose?
>>>>
>>>> Note, this is a merge conflict with the work that went via net-next
>>>> tree,
>>>> i.e. 24701ecea76b ("ebpf: move read-only fields to bpf_prog and shrink
>>>> bpf_prog_aux"). I believe that is why it didn't trigger on tip tree.
>>>>
>>>> You should be able to resolve it in linux-next by changing the test to:
>>>>
>>>>     if (prog->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
>>>
>>> Thanks Daniel, I will do that tomorrow.  Someone will have to remember
>>> to tell Linus.
>>
>> Yes, indeed, depending which tree is merged first.
>
> Daniel analysis is correct, but the fix for kernel/events/core.c
> should be:
> - if (prog->aux->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> + if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE) {
> instead of 'prog->prog_type'

Yes, absolutely, thanks!
--
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/