linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc 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: <20160719174551.GM2207@kernel.org>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jul 2016 14:45:51 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the
 luto-misc tree

Em Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 09:54:43AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 01:26:08PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> > On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 21:39:06 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > Em Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:26:29AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell escreveu:
> > > > If you have a single patch (or few) relative to yesterday's tip tree,
> > > > please send it to me as well and I will apply it as a fix patch if Ingo
> > > > doesn't get to pulling in time.  

> > > [acme@...et linux]$ git log --pretty=oneline  9fcfcdf3c7b613c0d9536f57587456411b8a4e33..ae3c14a028ed10552803b68276b6833295ba18cf 
> > > ae3c14a028ed10552803b68276b6833295ba18cf tools: Copy linux/{hash,poison}.h and check for drift
> > > 3aa0042769313b720142c0ef8514dac389e14ebe perf tools: Remove include/linux/list.h from perf's MANIFEST
> > > de1e17b1d0c81be472039798698b517c8a68b516 tools: Copy the bitops files accessed from the kernel and check for drift
> > > ad430729ae00dd63f7dcadbeb638e589bc03b5a3 Remove: kernel unistd*h files from perf's MANIFEST, not used
> > > e0643c4e9fdb2e77ab83ca596460e2c9c15728aa perf tools: Remove tools/perf/util/include/linux/const.h
> > > 7e3f36411342a54f1981fa97b43550b8406a3d69 perf tools: Remove tools/perf/util/include/asm/byteorder.h
> > > 14f0652b4fbebd0b05da36a06b17ac6d4d87a8f8 perf tools: Add missing linux/compiler.h include to perf-sys.h

> > > Available on my repo/branch:

> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git perf/core
> > > 
> > > I don't know exactly how linux-next works, would it be possible to merge in this branch
> > > till it gets into tip/perf/core?
> > 
> > OK, I added this to linux-next today (as a temporary measure), but it
> > fails the same way.  To be clear, I merged the above branch (without
> > the rest of the tip tree) and it fails the same way. :-(
> > 
> > It produces these errors (from the x86_64 allmodconfig build):
> > 
> > In fVile included from /home/sfr/next/next/tools/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h:10:0,
> >                  from /usr/include/asm-generic/int-ll64.h:11,
> >                  from /usr/include/powerpc64le-linux-gnu/asm/types.h:27,
> >                  from /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/linux/types.h:9,
> >                  from /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/linux/list.h:4,
> >                  from elf.h:23,
> >                  from elf.c:30:
> > /home/sfr/next/next/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h:13:2: error: #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> >  #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> >   ^
> > 
> > (and more similar).
> > 
> > I have applied my patch from yesterday ("tools: Simplify
> > __BITS_PER_LONG define"), and will continue on.
> 
> Ok, I'm trying the other way around, i.e. building a ppc64 kernel on a
> x86_64 machine, that is one setup I have access to easily.

No such luck, everything works as expected, objtool doesn't even get
compiled, likely it doesn't support powerpc binaries so it isn't built:

$ make -j4 O=../build/ppc-v4.7.0-rc5+/ ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=ppc64-linux-gnu- allmodconfig
$ make -j4 O=../build/ppc-v4.7.0-rc5+/ ARCH=powerpc CROSS_COMPILE=ppc64-linux-gnu-
<SNIP>
  IHEX2FW firmware/keyspan_pda/xircom_pgs.fw
  IHEX    firmware/cpia2/stv0672_vp4.bin
  IHEX    firmware/yam/1200.bin
  IHEX    firmware/yam/9600.bin
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/acme/git/build/ppc-v4.7.0-rc5+'
[acme@...et linux]$
[acme@...et linux]$ file ../build/ppc-v4.7.0-rc5+/vmlinux
../build/ppc-v4.7.0-rc5+/vmlinux: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, 64-bit PowerPC or cisco 7500, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, BuildID[sha1]=eeb5449106c3dd7f803a611449f2deaf792d5312, not stripped

cross compiling to x86-32 bits from x86-64 also works :-\

/me scratches head

Probably it got the local definition of bitsperlong.h, i.e. the size on the host build
and then comparing it against the one for the target host...

Anyway, can you try the patch below to see what value is landing on __BITS_PER_LONG?

diff --git a/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h b/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
index 45eca517efb3..c8f971e0d6a1 100644
--- a/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
+++ b/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@
 #endif
 
 #if BITS_PER_LONG != __BITS_PER_LONG
+#include <linux/stringify.h>
+#pragma message "BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(BITS_PER_LONG)
+#pragma message "__BITS_PER_LONG=" __stringify(__BITS_PER_LONG)
 #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
 #endif