linux-kernel - Re: arm64: pointer_auth.h:40:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_random_bytes'; did you mean 'get_random

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: <20200731021631.GA8247@1wt.eu>
Date:   Fri, 31 Jul 2020 04:16:31 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
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 12:40:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 12:05 PM Grygorii Strashko
> <grygorii.strashko@...com> wrote:
> >
> > FYI. Below diff seems fixes build:
> 
> Thanks, I'll do that instead, it looks like the right thing to do regardless.
> 
> Mind sending me a sign-off for it (and commit message would be lovely
> too, but I can make something up)? Yeah, it's just a one-liner, but
> let's do this right.

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.

Willy