linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 13 (drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c)

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]

Message-ID: <f5e6258b-ba76-001b-4942-588f4cbb0aa7@leemhuis.info>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 12:06:50 +0200
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>,
        linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux Regressions <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 13 (drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c)

On 18.07.23 05:32, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 09:11:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 7/12/23 19:37, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Changes since 20230712:
>>
>> on ppc64:
>>
>> In file included from ../include/linux/device.h:15,
>>                  from ../arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h:22,
>>                  from ../include/linux/io.h:13,
>>                  from ../include/linux/irq.h:20,
>>                  from ../arch/powerpc/include/asm/hardirq.h:6,
>>                  from ../include/linux/hardirq.h:11,
>>                  from ../include/linux/interrupt.h:11,
>>                  from ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c:25:
>> ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c: In function 'ps3fb_probe':
>> ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c:1172:40: error: 'struct fb_info' has no member named 'dev'
>>  1172 |                  dev_driver_string(info->dev), dev_name(info->dev),
>>       |                                        ^~
>> ../include/linux/dev_printk.h:110:37: note: in definition of macro 'dev_printk_index_wrap'
>>   110 |                 _p_func(dev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);                       \
>>       |                                     ^~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c:1171:9: note: in expansion of macro 'dev_info'
>>  1171 |         dev_info(info->device, "%s %s, using %u KiB of video memory\n",
>>       |         ^~~~~~~~
>> ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c:1172:61: error: 'struct fb_info' has no member named 'dev'
>>  1172 |                  dev_driver_string(info->dev), dev_name(info->dev),
>>       |                                                             ^~
>> ../include/linux/dev_printk.h:110:37: note: in definition of macro 'dev_printk_index_wrap'
>>   110 |                 _p_func(dev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);                       \
>>       |                                     ^~~~~~~~~~~
>> ../drivers/video/fbdev/ps3fb.c:1171:9: note: in expansion of macro 'dev_info'
>>  1171 |         dev_info(info->device, "%s %s, using %u KiB of video memory\n",
>>       |         ^~~~~~~~
> 
> Hmm, there is no response from Thomas yet. I guess we should go with
> reverting bdb616479eff419, right?

I'm missing something here:

* What makes you think this is caused by bdb616479eff419? I didn't see
anything in the thread that claims this, but I might be missing something
* related: if I understand Randy right, this is only happening in -next;
so why is bdb616479eff419 the culprit, which is also in mainline since
End of June?

And asking for a revert already is a bit jumping the gun; sure, it would
be good to get this fixed, but remember: developers have a lot on their
plate and thus sometimes are forced to set priorities; they also
sometimes go on vacation or are afk for other reasons; and sometimes
they just miss a mail or two. These are just a few reasons why there
might be good reasons why Thomas didn't look into this yet, hence please
first ask really kindly before asking for a revert.

Ciao, Thorsten