linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 19 (UML)

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]

Message-ID: <20230920091714.10053ba5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:18:28 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-um <linux-um@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 19 (UML)

Hi Nick,

On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 14:18:36 -0700 Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 08:42:07AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > 
> > on i386 or x86_64:
> > 
> > ../arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.c: In function 'execmem_arch_params':
> > ../arch/x86/um/../kernel/module.c:54:50: error: implicit declaration of function 'kaslr_enabled'; did you mean 'kasan_enabled'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >    54 |         if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE) && kaslr_enabled())
> >       |                                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >       |                                                  kasan_enabled
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > git blames this on:
> > 
> > commit 12633d679796
> > Author: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> > Date:   Tue Sep 19 15:14:03 2023 +1000
> > 
> >     Revert "arch: make execmem setup available regardless of CONFIG_MODULES"
> >     
> >     This reverts commit 3300c3af20090ff5e03e5c4bf2ef2cfaa03d4e9b.  
> 
> Thanks for the report, FWIW, our CI is hitting this, too.
> 
> Was 12633d679796 a pure revert, or was it manually modified?

It was a pure revert due to having to revert a previous commit to fix a
boot warning.  These reverts should not need to be in the next
linux-next as a patch has been applied to the appropriate included tree
to fix the boot warning.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped