[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgPPibftjeuvi+s=RSeZij3PEWDOxb05UH4yRJWeDMzFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 22:25:41 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, Emese Revfy <re.emese@...il.com>,
hsinyi@...omium.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: arm64: pointer_auth.h:40:3: error: implicit declaration of
function 'get_random_bytes'; did you mean 'get_random_once'?
On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 7:16 PM Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> wrote:
>
> Don't you want to take Mark's patch anyway in addition to all this ? In
> case anyone meets yet another build issue, they'd have more luck trying
> to revert any other patch. Right now if they revert one, it breaks the
> build in a different way and doesn't help much.
I think Will picked up Mark's patch into the arm64 tree, so I felt I
should let it come in eventually that way.
The immediate problems seem to have been resolved.
Knock wood.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists