linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/113] 6.6.91-rc2 review

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: <2f1ae598-0339-4e17-8156-03e8525a213d@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 06:49:05 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc: patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org,
 patches@...nelci.org, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de,
 jonathanh@...dia.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
 srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org,
 hargar@...rosoft.com, broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 000/113] 6.6.91-rc2 review

On 5/14/25 06:04, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.6.91 release.
> There are 113 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> let me know.
> 
> Responses should be made by Fri, 16 May 2025 12:55:38 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 

Building x86_64:allnoconfig ... failed
Building x86_64:tinyconfig ... failed
Building i386:defconfig ... failed
Building i386:allyesconfig ... failed
Building i386:allmodconfig ... failed
Building i386:allnoconfig ... failed
Building i386:tinyconfig ... failed
--------------
Error log:
arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c:1452:5: error: redefinition of 'its_static_thunk'

As far as I can see, its_static_thunk() is built if CONFIG_FINEIBT=n,
but the header file uses CONFIG_MITIGATION_ITS to determine if the dummy
function should be used. The redefinition is seen if both are disabled.

Guenter