linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 2 (lib/ubsan.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: <84531c68-2ac8-924b-5e71-077f9abb2503@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:38:31 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.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>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 2 (lib/ubsan.c)

On 9/4/20 12:59 AM, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 11:12 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 9/2/20 8:44 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 9/2/20 1:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Changes since 20200828:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> on i386:
>>>
>>> ../lib/ubsan.c: In function ‘ubsan_prologue’:
>>> ../lib/ubsan.c:141:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘kunit_fail_current_test’; did you mean ‘kunit_init_test’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>   kunit_fail_current_test();
>>>
>>>
>>> Full randconfig file is attached.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Brendan,
>>
>> Do you know anything about this build error?
>>
>> I can't find kunit_fail_current_test() anywhere.
> 
> Yeah, this got applied for some reason without the prerequisite
> patches. It is from a two patch series, the other being here:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/20200813205722.1384108-1-urielguajardojr@gmail.com/
> 
> which in turn depends on another patchset which didn't make it into 5.9.
> 
> Again, I don't know why this was applied without it's prereqs. Sorry about that.
> 

Well.  Who is responsible for this small mess?
It is still killing linux-next builds for me (2020-0908).

-- 
~Randy