linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] watchdog: Fix build error when CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP

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:   Thu, 28 Jul 2022 13:18:06 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: Fix build error when
 CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR is not set

Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com> writes:
> Le 27/07/2022 à 13:38, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
>> Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com> writes:
>>> Sachin reported the following build error when CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR
>>> is not set:
>>>
>>> kernel/watchdog.c:597:20: error: static declaration of 'lockup_detector_reconfigure' follows non-static declaration
>>>  static inline void lockup_detector_reconfigure(void)
>>>                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> In file included from kernel/watchdog.c:17:
>>> ./include/linux/nmi.h:125:6: note: previous declaration of 'lockup_detector_reconfigure' was here
>>>  void lockup_detector_reconfigure(void);
>>>       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> The definition of lockup_detector_reconfigure should be exported even in
>>> that case, and __lockup_detector_reconfigure should remain static.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 24a1260705b7 ("watchdog: export lockup_detector_reconfigure")
>>> Reported-by: Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ux.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  kernel/watchdog.c | 4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> I'll squash that in to the original commit.
>
> Thanks Michael,
>
> I was thinking this is too late for such a squash.

It usually would be, if I was organised, so sending a follow-up was the
correct thing for you to do :)

cheers