[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201007154633.akspeclzc3z7urd6@treble>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 10:46:33 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the vfs tree
On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 08:04:05AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 09:30:12 -0500 Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 11:10:56PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > > Josh, any ideas? We could, of course, make it "r"(size), but that would
> > > > be unpleasant in all existing callers...
> > >
> > > Sorry, I've been traveling. I'd just vote for making it "r".
> > >
> > > array_index_nospec() is always called after a usercopy. I don't think
> > > anyone will notice the extra mov, for the cases where it would be
> > > propagated as an immediate. And the argument *is* an unsigned long
> > > after all.
> > >
> > > Stephen, can you confirm this fixes it?
> >
> > Still traveling, I didn't see an update on this. Any objections to the
> > below? I assume it fixes Stephen's build issue.
>
> Yes, it does fix my x86_64 allnoconfig build.
Stephen, thanks!
Al, do you want to fold that change in? Or shall I post another
version?
--
Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists