linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ipmi 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: <20190403202728.GD2479@minyard.net>
Date:   Wed, 3 Apr 2019 15:27:29 -0500
From:   Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ipmi tree

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:33:23PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Corey,
> 
> After merging the ipmi tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:

Paul, any opinions on this?  Is just running this in a workqueue
the best idea?

-corey

> 
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c: In function 'free_user':
> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c:1268:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced'; did you mean 'cleanup_srcu_struct'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced(&user->release_barrier);
>   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   cleanup_srcu_struct
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   487ecb21fa66 ("ipmi: fix sleep-in-atomic in free_user at cleanup SRCU user->release_barrier")
> 
> interacting with commit
> 
>   f5ad3991493c ("srcu: Remove cleanup_srcu_struct_quiesced()")
> 
> from the rcu tree.
> 
> Based on the comments in the rcu tree commit, I have reverted the impi
> tree commit for today.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell