linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the asm-generic tree

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: <784a34e5-4654-44c9-9c07-f9f4ffd952a0@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 13:44:34 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
 "Christian Brauner" <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: Christian Göttsche <cgzones@...glemail.com>,
 "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
 Christian Göttsche <cgzones@...glemail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the asm-generic tree

On Tue, Jul 9, 2024, at 12:08, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 10:57:09 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the fs-next tree got conflicts in:
>> 
>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd.h
>>   arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd32.h
>> 
>> between commit:
>> 
>>   ea0130bf3c45 ("arm64: convert unistd_32.h to syscall.tbl format")
>> 
>> from the asm-generic tree and commit:
>> 
>>   e6873349f700 ("fs/xattr: add *at family syscalls")
>> 
>> from the vfs-brauner tree.
>> 
>> I fixed it up (I used the former versions) and can carry the fix as
>> necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
>> non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
>> when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
>> cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
>> particularly complex conflicts.
>
> This resolution may be not enough as I now get the following warnings
> from the arm64 defconfig build:
>
> <stdin>:1603:2: warning: #warning syscall setxattrat not implemented [-Wcpp]
> <stdin>:1606:2: warning: #warning syscall getxattrat not implemented [-Wcpp]
> <stdin>:1609:2: warning: #warning syscall listxattrat not implemented [-Wcpp]
> <stdin>:1612:2: warning: #warning syscall removexattrat not implemented [-Wcpp]

I see. The newly added syscalls need to be copied from
include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h into the newly added
scripts/syscall.tbl. I am aware of this and was planning
to send this as a fixup afterward to avoid an awkward
four-way merge with the uretprobe and xattrat patches.

Based on your merge in 1dd7a574e54e ("Merge branch
'for-next' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/
git/trace/linux-trace.git"), I think we want this
to be in all syscall.tbl files:

diff --git a/scripts/syscall.tbl b/scripts/syscall.tbl
index b0ea892de12e..4873fa3ca496 100644
--- a/scripts/syscall.tbl
+++ b/scripts/syscall.tbl
@@ -419,3 +419,8 @@
 460	common	lsm_set_self_attr		sys_lsm_set_self_attr
 461	common	lsm_list_modules		sys_lsm_list_modules
 462	common	mseal				sys_mseal
+463	common	setxattrat			sys_setxattrat
+464	common	getxattrat			sys_getxattrat
+465	common	listxattrat			sys_listxattrat
+466	common	removexattrat			sys_removexattrat
+467	64	uretprobe			sys_uretprobe

Though I'm still not sure what uretprobe is only added
to half the architectures at the moment. There is a chance
we need a different conditional for it than '64'.

      Arnd