linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mips: DEC: honor CONFIG_MIPS_FP

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, 7 Mar 2022 13:20:40 +0100
From:   Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>,
        "Maciej W . Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mips: DEC: honor CONFIG_MIPS_FP_SUPPORT=n

On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 08:24:27AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Include the DECstation interrupt handler in opting out of
> FPU support.
> 
> Fixes a linker error:
> 
> mips-linux-ld: arch/mips/dec/int-handler.o: in function `fpu':
> (.text+0x148): undefined reference to `handle_fpe_int'
> 
> Fixes: 183b40f992c8 ("MIPS: Allow FP support to be disabled")
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Cc: Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>
> Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
> Cc: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@...am.me.uk>
> Cc: linux-mips@...r.kernel.org
> ---
> v2: add another ifdef block in int-handler.S; (Maciej)
>     add an ifdef block in dec/setup.c; (Maciej)
> v3: use IS_ENABLED() instead of an ifdef block in dec/setup.c; (Maciej)
> 
>  arch/mips/dec/int-handler.S |    6 +++---
>  arch/mips/dec/setup.c       |    3 ++-
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

applied to mips-next.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]