linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the arm64 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20190816172715.i7wib7ilhua5gkuw@willie-the-truck>
Date:   Fri, 16 Aug 2019 18:27:16 +0100
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:     Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the arm64 tree

Hi Michael,

On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 02:52:40PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> writes:
> > Although Alpha, Itanic and PowerPC all override NM, only PowerPC does it
> > conditionally so I agree with you that passing '--synthetic' unconditionally
> > would resolve the problem and is certainly my preferred approach if mpe is
> > ok with it.
> 
> I'd rather we keep passing --synthetic, otherwise there's the potential
> that symbols go missing that were previously visible.

Yup -- that was my suggestion above.

> I think we can keep the new_nm check, but drop the dependency on
> CONFIG_PPC64, and that will fix it. Worst case is we start passing
> --synthetic on ppc32, but that's probably not a problem.
> 
> This seems to fix it for me, and 32-bit builds fine.

Brill, thanks for confirming!

> Do you want me to send a proper patch for this, or do you want to squash
> it into the original series?

I'd prefer not to rebase the arm64 queue, so if you send this as a proper
patch, please, then I can queue it on top before reverting the hack we
currently have.

Will