linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 17 (mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.c)

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: <ce11a0b5-22a6-dd18-f858-5d30f43e1128@intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:28:21 +0300
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
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>,
        Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 17 (mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.c)

On 20/04/20 12:12 pm, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> + Masahiro Yamada, Adrian Hunter
> 
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 16:48, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/16/20 9:50 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since 20200416:
>>>
>>
>> on i386:
>>
>>   CC      drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.o
>> In file included from ../include/linux/build_bug.h:5:0,
>>                  from ../include/linux/bitfield.h:10,
>>                  from ../drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.c:9:
>> ../drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.c: In function ‘sdhci_at91_set_clks_presets’:
>> ../include/linux/compiler.h:394:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_63’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>>   _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
>>                                       ^
>> ../include/linux/compiler.h:375:4: note: in definition of macro ‘__compiletime_assert’
>>     prefix ## suffix();    \
>>     ^~~~~~
>> ../include/linux/compiler.h:394:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘_compiletime_assert’
>>   _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
>>   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../include/linux/build_bug.h:39:37: note: in expansion of macro ‘compiletime_assert’
>>  #define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg) compiletime_assert(!(cond), msg)
>>                                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../include/linux/bitfield.h:49:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG’
>>    BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(__builtin_constant_p(_val) ?  \
>>    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../include/linux/bitfield.h:94:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__BF_FIELD_CHECK’
>>    __BF_FIELD_CHECK(_mask, 0ULL, _val, "FIELD_PREP: "); \
>>    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-at91.c:185:11: note: in expansion of macro ‘FIELD_PREP’
>>   caps1 |= FIELD_PREP(SDHCI_CLOCK_MUL_MASK, clk_mul);

My guess is the compiler has decided clk_mul is constant (probably (unsigned
int)-1) because there is no CONFIG_COMMON_CLK i.e. clk_get_rate() is 0

So maybe add to config MMC_SDHCI_OF_AT91

	depends on COMMON_CLK

>>            ^~~~~~~~~~
>>
>>
>> Full randconfig file is attached.
>>
>>
>> --
>> ~Randy
>> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> 
> Thanks for reporting! I have looped in the relevant people, let's see
> how we move forward with this.
> 
> I assume the offending commit is this one:
> Author: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> Date:   Wed Apr 8 16:21:05 2020 +0900
> mmc: sdhci: use FIELD_GET/PREP for capabilities bit masks
> 
> Kind regards
> Uffe
>