linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] drm fixes round two for 5.13-rc1

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]

Date:   Mon, 10 May 2021 09:28:08 +1000
From:   Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm fixes round two for 5.13-rc1

On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 07:08, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 11:16 AM Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Bit later than usual, I queued them all up on Friday then promptly
> > forgot to write the pull request email. This is mainly amdgpu fixes,
> > with some radeon/msm/fbdev and one i915 gvt fix thrown in.
>
> Hmm. Gcc seems ok with this, but clang complains:
>
>    drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c:736:21: warning: attribute
> declaration must precede definition [-Wignored-attributes]
>    static const struct __maybe_unused seq_operations proc_fb_seq_ops = {
>                        ^
>
> but I noticed it only after I had already pushed out the pull.
>
> I'm actually surprised that gcc accepted that horrid mess: putting
> "__maybe_unused" between the "struct" and the struct name is very very
> wrong.
>
> I fixed it up after the merge due to not noticing earlier..
>
> Maybe the drm test robots should start testing with clang too?

My current build, test + sign machine " 09:23:22 up 419 days", running
fc29, has clang 7 which is my current blocker on implementing a clang
bit in my build cycles.

The machine is in an office, that due to RH not being able to fathom a
country where COVID isn't rampant, I have to fill insane amounts of
paperwork and high management intervention to visit, I'm afraid to
remote upgrade or reboot it unless I really have to.

I've some rough ideas to update it to f33/34 which would give me a
good enough clang, I suppose I could just build my own llvm/clang I've
done so for years for other reasons, if I can't come up with an update
plan soon I might consider it.

Dave.