linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 27

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]

Date:   Fri, 27 Mar 2020 17:24:07 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Mar 27

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 08:52:47AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 3/27/20 1:07 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Changes since 20200326:
> > 
> 
> on i386, UML defconfig build fails with: (mostly get_user() variants)

Buggered-by: 1a908babcb144 (x86: replace arch macros from compiler with CONFIG_X86_{32,64})

    If the intention is to check i386/x86_64 excluding UML, testing
    CONFIG_X86_{32,64} is simpler.

Which is not true, since uml/x86 configs bloody well *do* have CONFIG_X86_{32,64}
defined.  See arch/x86/um/Kconfig; and yes, it does need those, as well as
arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu.