linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tty: tty_io: remove hung_up_tty

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]

Date:   Sat, 29 Apr 2023 08:21:31 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        syzbot <syzbot+b7c3ba8cdc2f6cf83c21@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: tty_io: remove hung_up_tty_fops

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 07:31:35PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 01:41:02AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > On 2023/04/29 1:27, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > I see this change has shown up in -next as commit 4c87e9e5479b ("tty:
> > > tty_io: remove hung_up_tty_fops"), where it causes the following warning
> > > for configurations without CONFIG_COMPAT (I used ARCH=arm defconfig):
> > > 
> > >   drivers/tty/tty_io.c:446:13: warning: 'hung_up_tty_compat_ioctl' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> > >     446 | static long hung_up_tty_compat_ioctl(struct file *file,
> > >         |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > 
> > > I am not sure if you just added that patch for additional test coverage
> > > or for final acceptance but the following diff resolves this warning for
> > > me, perhaps it can be folded in for a v2?
> > 
> > Thank you for reporting. Yes, moving the definition will solve the warning.
> > 
> > I'm testing this patch using my volatile tree before getting merged to a
> > permanent tree.
> 
> How are you adding new stuff to linux-next right now when the tree
> should be "closed"?  And I haven't reviewed this yet, what tree has

That happens all the time, and quite often the "late" additions are applied
to mainline immediately afterwards and end up causing problems there.
I can only hope that this won't happen with this one.

> picked it up?
> 
> Please wait until after -rc1 is out for new stuff, you know this...
> 

This patch is supposed to fix a data race, so maybe it wasn't considered
"new". Just guessing, of course.

Guenter