linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drm-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: <CAKGbVbt4W8UUST8HZ0tPuHyGv4qx98hMqmkhWmJB5K-TbReg5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Apr 2019 21:33:25 +0800
From:   Qiang Yu <yuq825@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drm-misc tree

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:21 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 10:50:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_ctx.c
> > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int lima_ctx_create(struct lima_device *dev, struct lima_ctx_mgr *mgr, u32 *id)
> >                       goto err_out0;
> >       }
> >
> > -     err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, UINT_MAX, ctx, GFP_KERNEL);
> > +     err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, ctx, XA_LIMIT(*id, UINT_MAX), GFP_KERNEL);
> >       if (err < 0)
> >               goto err_out0;
>
> I agree that this is an exact translation of what the code was doing,
> but I don't think it's what the author intended the code to do.
> They almost certainly meant:
>
>         err = xa_alloc(&mgr->handles, id, ctx, xa_limit_32b, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> I'm basing this on:
>
> +struct drm_lima_ctx_create {
> +       __u32 id;          /* out, context handle */
> +       __u32 _pad;        /* pad, must be zero */
> +};
>
> (and this confusion is exactly why I changed the API ...)

Right, I plan to send out a patch like yours after drm-misc-next merge
5.1 changes, as this is a build fix patch and already applied to somewhere.
I can send out another patch now if merge guys could use the new one
directly.