linux-kernel - Re: scripts/selinux build error in 4.14 after glibc update

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: <CAHC9VhQNdSLfZK6QD1WnCzhdpa9NyjzrDwMks7SKgtuc6+5JgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:03 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, selinux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Nicolas Iooss <nicolas.iooss@....org>
Subject: Re: scripts/selinux build error in 4.14 after glibc update

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:52 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:47:00AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:09 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:02:29AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 8:40 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 09:43:09AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 9:29 AM Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 09:59:47PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > > > > >On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 5:00 PM Nathan Chancellor
> > > > > > > ><natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> After a glibc update to 2.29, my 4.14 builds started failing like so:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>   HOSTCC  scripts/selinux/genheaders/genheaders
> > > > > > > >> In file included from scripts/selinux/genheaders/genheaders.c:19:
> > > > > > > >> ./security/selinux/include/classmap.h:245:2: error: #error New address family defined, please update secclass_map.
> > > > > > > >>  #error New address family defined, please update secclass_map.
> > > > > > > >>   ^~~~~
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >This is a known problem that has a fix in the selinux/next branch and
> > > > > > > >will be going up to Linus during the next merge window.  The fix is
> > > > > > > >quite small and should be relatively easy for you to backport to your
> > > > > > > >kernel build if you are interested; the patch can be found at the
> > > > > > > >archive link below:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/20190225005528.28371-1-paulo@paulo.ac
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why is it waiting for the next merge window? It fixes a build bug that
> > > > > > > people hit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I place a reasonably high bar on patches that I send up to Linus
> > > > > > outside of the merge window and I didn't feel this patch met that
> > > > > > criteria.  Nathan is only the second person I've seen who has
> > > > > > encountered this problem, the first being the original patch author.
> > > > > > As far as I've seen, the problem is only seen by users building older
> > > > > > kernels on very new userspaces (e.g. glibc v2.29 was released in
> > > > > > February 2019, Linux v4.14 was released in 2017); this doesn't appear
> > > > > > to be a large group of people and I didn't want to risk breaking the
> > > > > > main kernel tree during the -rcX phase for such a small group.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ugh, this breaks my local builds, I would recommend getting it to Linus
> > > > > sooner please.
> > > >
> > > > Well, we are at -rc7 right now and it looks like an -rc8 is unlikely
> > > > so the question really comes down to can/do you want to wait a week?
> > >
> > > It's a regression in the 5.1-rc tree, that is hitting people now.  Why
> > > do you want to have a 5.1-final that is known to be broken?
> >
> > I believe I answered that in my reply to Sasha.  Can you answer the
> > question I asked of you above?
>
> If you don't submit it this week, I guess I can wait as I have no other
> choice.
>
> But note, this did break my build systems, and my main development
> system this weekend.  So yes, the number of people being affected might
> be "small", but that "small" number includes the people responsible for
> maintaining those stable kernels :(
>
> Anyway, it's your call, just letting you know I'm really annoyed at the
> moment by this...

It's against my better judgement, but I'll send a PR up to Linus now.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com