linux-kernel - Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH -next] fs: dlm: Fix build error without DEBUG_LOCK

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]

Message-ID: <CAK-6q+gb074RyyfVnbkeQWiY7FDQf0j-jwJ0LfmM8ojafwy7-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 08:49:54 -0500
From:   Alexander Aring <aahringo@...hat.com>
To:     Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com>
Cc:     cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        zhengbin13@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH -next] fs: dlm: Fix build error without DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 8:39 AM Alexander Aring <aahringo@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 8:37 AM Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@...wei.com> wrote:
> >
> > If CONFIG_DLM is y, DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is n, building fails:
> >
> > fs/dlm/lowcomms.o: In function `lowcomms_queue_rwork':
> > lowcomms.c:(.text+0x2ac): undefined reference to `lockdep_is_held'
> > lowcomms.c:(.text+0x308): undefined reference to `lockdep_is_held'
> > fs/dlm/lowcomms.o: In function `lowcomms_queue_swork':
> > lowcomms.c:(.text+0x3e0): undefined reference to `lockdep_is_held'
> > fs/dlm/lowcomms.o: In function `restore_callbacks':
> > lowcomms.c:(.text+0xd8c): undefined reference to `lockdep_is_held'
> > lowcomms.c:(.text+0xdcc): undefined reference to `lockdep_is_held'
> >
> > Make DLM select DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC to fix this.
> >
>
> Thanks, there is a different approach already in dlm/next and I think
> we don't want to have dlm selecting a debug option.

btw. I am curious why lockdep defines a prototype and not an
implementation for it if LOCKDEP is not set. In my opinion there
should be some no-op functions for it that the compiler puts it out if
it's not set. Then we don't end in #idefs inside the implementation...

- Alex