linux-kernel - Re: drm/i915: undefined symbol I915_SW_FENCE_CHECK

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160912065650.GV20027@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:56:50 +0100
From:   Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
To:     Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>
Cc:     joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: drm/i915: undefined symbol I915_SW_FENCE_CHECK_DAG

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:46:39AM +0200, Valentin Rothberg wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> 
> your commit e68a139f6bf3 ("drm/i915: Add a sw fence for collecting up
> dma fences") has shown up in today's linux-next (i.e., 20160912)
> adding the following the lines (184++):
> 
> +       if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I915_SW_FENCE_CHECK_DAG))
> +               return false;
> 
> The Kconfig symbol isn't defined anywhere, so the function will always
> return false.  I could not find a patch on LKML adding the symbol.  Is
> there a patch queued somewhere or is the yet unconditional return
> intentional?

The patch is queued up elsewhere. It's part of the selftests.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre