[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <72f3d6cf-a03b-4a16-9983-77d3dd70b0ea@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 12:52:52 +0100
From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
<mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] vdso: Modify getrandom to include the correct
namespace
On 04/09/2024 18:26, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 03/09/2024 à 17:14, Vincenzo Frascino a écrit :
...
>
> Now build fails on powerpc because struct vgetrandom_opaque_params is unknown.
>
> x86 get it by chance via the following header inclusion chain:
>
> In file included from ./include/linux/random.h:10,
> from ./include/linux/nodemask.h:98,
> from ./include/linux/mmzone.h:18,
> from ./include/linux/gfp.h:7,
> from ./include/linux/xarray.h:16,
> from ./include/linux/radix-tree.h:21,
> from ./include/linux/idr.h:15,
> from ./include/linux/kernfs.h:12,
> from ./include/linux/sysfs.h:16,
> from ./include/linux/kobject.h:20,
> from ./include/linux/of.h:18,
> from ./include/linux/clocksource.h:19,
> from ./include/clocksource/hyperv_timer.h:16,
> from ./arch/x86/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h:21,
> from ./include/vdso/datapage.h:164,
> from arch/x86/entry/vdso/../../../../lib/vdso/getrandom.c:7,
> from arch/x86/entry/vdso/vgetrandom.c:7:
>
>
>
>
This tells me very little ;)
Can you please provide more details? e.g. What is the error you are getting? How
do I reproduce it?
I am happy to include the required change as part of this series.
Overall, the reason why I am doing this exercise it to sanitize the headers for
all the architectures so that in future we do not have issues. It is good we
find problems now.
--
Regards,
Vincenzo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists