linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locking/rwsem: Add DEBUG_RWSEMS to look for lock/unlock mismatches

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0f7f4e7e-7bdd-3069-8808-944cf34d509c@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:21:45 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Cc:     kbuild-all@...org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/rwsem: Add DEBUG_RWSEMS to look for lock/unlock
 mismatches

On 03/27/2018 07:24 AM, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi Waiman,
>
> Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on tip/locking/core]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.16-rc7 next-20180326]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system]
>
> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Waiman-Long/locking-rwsem-Add-DEBUG_RWSEMS-to-look-for-lock-unlock-mismatches/20180327-151310
> config: i386-allmodconfig (attached as .config)
> compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.3.0-1) 7.3.0
> reproduce:
>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>         make ARCH=i386 
>
> All error/warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
>    In file included from include/linux/kernel.h:10:0,
>                     from kernel/locking/rwsem.c:9:
>    kernel/locking/rwsem.c: In function 'up_read_non_owner':
>>> kernel/locking/rwsem.c:217:23: error: implicit declaration of function 'RWSEM_WRITER_OWNED'; did you mean 'RWSEM_READER_OWNED'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Yes, I noticed that error right after sending out the patch. That is why
I sent out a v2 patch immediately to fix this. Thanks for the
notification anyway.

Cheers,
Longman