linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix: rseq uapi: Adapt header includes to follow glibc header changes

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: <f5bd06bb-da51-48c1-bf79-d1ef92802adf@efficios.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Nov 2023 16:10:04 -0400
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix: rseq uapi: Adapt header includes to follow glibc
 header changes

On 2023-10-27 10:06, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:37:26 -0400
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2023-10-27 03:53, kernel test robot wrote:
>>> Hi Mathieu,
>>>
>>> kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
>>>
>>> [auto build test WARNING on linus/master]
>>> [also build test WARNING on v6.6-rc7 next-20231026]
>>> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
>>> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
>>> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>>
>> The test robot complains about using <asm/types.h> in uapi headers for
>> !__KERNEL__ case.
>>
>> Steven, was there something wrong with including linux/types.h in uapi
>> headers ?
>>
> 
> Actually, linux/types.h includes asm/types.h so I don't think that was the
> issue. I think the issue was mostly with:
> 
>   #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> 
> Replacing linux/types.h with asm/types.h worked, but may have been
> unnecessary.

Hi Steven,

So what is the minimal change required to make things work on your 
setup? I just tested with a Debian "testing" chroot (with libc 2.37-12) 
and I cannot reproduce your issue.

Should I just submit a patch that removes "#include <asm/byteorder.h>" ? 
I am really unsure which environments are affected though.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com