linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] tools: fix compilation failure caused by init_disassemble

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, 4 Jul 2022 13:19:22 -0700
From:   Andres Freund <andres@...razel.de>
To:     Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] tools: fix compilation failure caused by
 init_disassemble_info API changes

Hi,

On 2022-07-04 11:13:33 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> I think the disassembler checks should not be displayed by default,
> with your change I can see all the time:
> 
> ...        disassembler-four-args: [ on  ]
> ...      disassembler-init-styled: [ OFF ]
> 
> 
> could you please squash something like below in? moving disassembler
> checks out of sight and do manual detection

Makes sense - I was wondering why disassembler-four-args is displayed, but
though it better to mirror the existing behaviour. Does "hiding"
disassembler-four-args need to be its own set of commits?


> diff --git a/tools/perf/Makefile.config b/tools/perf/Makefile.config
> index ee417c321adb..2aa0bad11f05 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/Makefile.config
> +++ b/tools/perf/Makefile.config
> @@ -914,8 +914,6 @@ ifndef NO_LIBBFD
>          FEATURE_CHECK_LDFLAGS-disassembler-init-styled += -liberty -lz -ldl
>        endif
>      endif
> -    $(call feature_check,disassembler-four-args)
> -    $(call feature_check,disassembler-init-styled)
>    endif
>  
>    ifeq ($(feature-libbfd-buildid), 1)
> @@ -1025,6 +1023,9 @@ ifdef HAVE_KVM_STAT_SUPPORT
>      CFLAGS += -DHAVE_KVM_STAT_SUPPORT
>  endif
>  
> +$(call feature_check,disassembler-four-args)
> +$(call feature_check,disassembler-init-styled)
> +
>  ifeq ($(feature-disassembler-four-args), 1)
>      CFLAGS += -DDISASM_FOUR_ARGS_SIGNATURE
>  endif

This I don't understand - why do we want these to run under NO_LIBBFD etc?

Greetings,

Andres Freund