linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h>

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, 9 Jan 2023 14:46:07 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...nel.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
        linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bit_spinlock: Include <asm/processor.h>

On Sun,  8 Jan 2023 20:04:44 +0100 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:

> In an attempt to simplify some includes in <include/dcache.h>, it
> appeared, when compiling fs/ecryptfs/dentry.c, that <linux/bit_spinlock.h>
> was relying on other includes to get the definition of cpu_relax().
> (see [1])
> 
> It broke on arc.
> 
> Include <asm/processor.h> in <linux/bit_spinlock.h> to fix the issue.
> This will help remove some un-needed includes from <include/dcache.h>.
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202301082130.LXMj5qkD-lkp@intel.com/
> 
> ...
>
> --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>  #ifndef __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H
>  #define __LINUX_BIT_SPINLOCK_H
>  
> +#include <asm/processor.h>
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/preempt.h>
>  #include <linux/atomic.h>

linux/processor.h would be preferable, rather than diving straight into asm/?