linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 RESEND] firmware: stratix10-svc: build only on 64-bit ARM

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 5 Apr 2021 08:09:02 -0500
From:   Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Richard Gong <richard.gong@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 RESEND] firmware: stratix10-svc: build only on 64-bit
 ARM



On 4/5/21 5:30 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 10:20:26AM -0500, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/4/21 9:08 AM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 07:46:09AM -0500, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
>>>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
>>>>
>>>> The Stratix10 service layer and RCU drivers are useful only on
>>>> Stratix10, so on ARMv8.  Compile testing the RCU driver on 32-bit ARM
>>>> fails:
>>>>
>>>>     drivers/firmware/stratix10-rsu.c: In function 'rsu_status_callback':
>>>>     include/linux/compiler_types.h:320:38: error: call to '__compiletime_assert_179'
>>>>       declared with attribute error: FIELD_GET: type of reg too small for mask
>>>>       _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
>>>>     ...
>>>>     drivers/firmware/stratix10-rsu.c:96:26: note: in expansion of macro 'FIELD_GET'
>>>>       priv->status.version = FIELD_GET(RSU_VERSION_MASK,
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 4483397b0353 ("ARM: socfpga: drop ARCH_SOCFPGA")
>>>
>>> Where is this commit id?  I don't see it in Linus's tree, is it
>>> somewhere else?
>>>
>>
>> It's in the for-next branch in the soc tree. This patch fixes a patch that
>> was just recently submitted by Krzysztof.
> 
> Then it needs to go through that tree, while you sent it "To:" me, and I
> can't do anything with it at the moment :(
> 

Ah okay, got it, thanks!

Dinh