linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] um: let 'make clean' properly clean underlying SUBARCH as well

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: <CAMuHMdUwE7btR+ebG8-gvPb8GPnxUGPWw3yKR4qM4Uc_mYcHhg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 09:38:26 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, 
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, 
	linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: let 'make clean' properly clean underlying SUBARCH as well

Hi Johannes,

On Thu, 8 May 2025 at 07:29, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-05-07 at 15:38 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > My workflow:
> >
> > - Build kernel on x86_64 with CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT enabled
> >
> > - Check for arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
> >    ls arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
> >       arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
> >
> > - make ARCH=um O=/linux/build
> >
> >    This patch cleans the source tree, but doesn't remove
> >    arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
> >
> > - ls arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
> >       arch/x86/realmode/rm/pasyms.h
>
> Is that even _expected_ to work? If you have x86 built first, I'd almost
> expect you to have to do "make ARCH=x86 mrproper" before building
> another ARCH. I don't see how ARCH=um would know how to do a full clean
> up of ARCH=x86, unless this is somehow arch-independent?
>
> Or maybe that's not an issue with other architectures because UML is
> special in that it uses parts of x86?

Probably.
I only use my linux-next source tree for fixing reported build issues on
various architectures, and I never use make clean/mrproper.  Works fine.

> Though I guess the patch here should make it do that, more or less, but
> it can't, likely because you're also switching from in-tree build to O=
> build?

Yeah, mixing in-tree and out-of-tree builds causes issues.
Never build in-tree in a source tree you use with O= (except for
e.g. "make tags").

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds