linux-kernel - Re: Build regressions/improvements in v5.17-rc4

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]

Message-ID: <0ddaa732-4112-0e3e-e395-bc92af2a194f@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:52:15 -0800
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Build regressions/improvements in v5.17-rc4



On 2/16/22 00:05, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Randy,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:14 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On 2/14/22 01:37, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> Below is the list of build error/warning regressions/improvements in
>>> v5.17-rc4[1] compared to v5.16[2].
>>>
>>> Summarized:
>>>   - build errors: +14/-2
>>>   - build warnings: +23/-25
> 
>>> 23 warning regressions:
>>>   + modpost: WARNING: modpost: drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed.o(.data+0x14410): Section mismatch in reference from the variable qed_mfw_legacy_maps to the variable .init.rodata:qed_mfw_legacy_bb_100g:  => N/A
>>
>> This is a little confusing. Was there a problem with qed and qede network drivers?
>> Is it still a problem?
> 
> Yes there is.
> 
>> Many of the lines above and below are very similar.
> 
> Sorry, my script to filter out errors/warnings that just moved does
> not handle modpost output yet.

I see. No problem.

>> If there is still a problem, what $ARCH and config(s) cause it?
>> I can't reproduce it on 11 $ARCH tries.
>> Or maybe it is compiler-specific also.
> 
> xtensa-gcc11/xtensa-allmodconfig
> http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/14697521/
> I don't know why it doesn't show up in the other gcc11 builds.
> 
> I had a look at the problem before, but fixing it is non-trivial:
> the driver uses a non-init table of structures that contains pointers
> to init data (only used early) and non-init data (used later, too).
> Sprinkling __ref over the code may help, but won't protect against
> introducing new bugs.

Got it. Thanks again.

-- 
~Randy