linux-kernel - Re: Issue With real-time patches on 5.15.y

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <29829c01-f31e-2c4f-06e9-fc15c0261f93@canonical.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 May 2022 15:15:09 -0400
From:   Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Issue With real-time patches on 5.15.y



On 5/5/22 19:35, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 5/5/22 16:18, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>> The real-time kernel build failure can be resolved by reverting commit
>> b50854eca0e0.  The failure seems to be due to the removal of an include
>> of xstate.h from pkru.h and caused spinlock_t to not be defined.  The
>> commit would only be reverted for the real-time kernel and not any other
>> kernels.  I wanted to see if reverting the commit is the proper
>> approach, or if cherry-picking additional commits might be a better
>> solution in preparation for additional changes that might be coming in
>> the future?
>>
>> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
> I thought you distro folks were the franenkernel experts. :)
>
> But, seriously...  This isn't rocket science.  Just look at the pkru.h
> in your tree and figure out what includes it needs.  If it needs FPU
> gunk, include the FPU header.  If you get a compile error for spinlock_t
> ...  well ...  find the code using spinlock_t and make sure it includes
> spinlock.h.
>
Thanks for the advice, Dave.

Your suggestion will probably be the easiest approach.  I was just 
trying to limit the amount of frankenkernel changes, since there are 
already so many  :-)  It's always best to stay as close to mainline as 
possible.