linux-kernel - Reporting (or not reporting) drm test build failures

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 09:57:10 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: DRI mailing list <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Daniel Diaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>,
 Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
Subject: Reporting (or not reporting) drm test build failures

Hi,

recently there was a suggestion that drm build tests on architectures
such as xtensa should not happen or not be reported. The current mainline
kernel experiences a number of drm related build failures.

Building csky:allmodconfig ... failed
--------------
Error log:
ERROR: modpost: "__udivdi3" [drivers/gpu/drm/sun4i/sun4i-drm-hdmi.ko] undefined!
make[3]: [scripts/Makefile.modpost:145: Module.symvers] Error 1 (ignored)

[ also seen with xtensa]

Building mips:allmodconfig ... failed
--------------
Error log:
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_lrc.c:100: error: "END" redefined

I really don't want to waste people's time if reporting such problems
is considered noise/nuisance. Is there some guidance available explaining
which architectures and/or platforms are "fair game" for drm build tests,
or, better, which platforms/architectures should explicitly _not_ build
test the drm subsystem ?

Thanks,
Guenter