linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] perf tools: Build failure in v6.16-rc1

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

Message-ID: <20250612062514.EZS2cVlO@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 08:25:14 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] perf tools: Build failure in v6.16-rc1

On 2025-06-11 16:01:00 [-0300], Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Is this needed? Aren't these defines coming from that local copy?
> 
> So, these are, as you say, in the copied linux/prctl.h, but in musl libc
> we have:
right, I briefly forgot about musl.
All good.
…
> I thought this would be something fixed in newer alpine versions, but
> no:
> 
> toolsbuilder@...e:~$ grep FAIL dm.log.old/summary 
>    5    19.53 alpine:3.16                   : FAIL gcc version 11.2.1 20220219 (Alpine 11.2.1_git20220219) 
>    6    20.83 alpine:3.17                   : FAIL gcc version 12.2.1 20220924 (Alpine 12.2.1_git20220924-r4) 
>    7    13.94 alpine:3.18                   : FAIL gcc version 12.2.1 20220924 (Alpine 12.2.1_git20220924-r10) 
>    8    16.60 alpine:3.19                   : FAIL gcc version 13.2.1 20231014 (Alpine 13.2.1_git20231014) 
>    9    15.72 alpine:3.20                   : FAIL gcc version 13.2.1 20240309 (Alpine 13.2.1_git20240309) 
>   10    16.38 alpine:3.22                   : FAIL gcc version 14.2.0 (Alpine 14.2.0) 
>   11    15.09 alpine:edge                   : FAIL gcc version 14.2.0 (Alpine 14.2.0) 
> toolsbuilder@...e:~$
> 
> So the easiest way out of this seems to be not to explicitely include
> linux/prctl.h and define the new stuff conditionally, as I did, right?

Let me drop an email to alpine and check with them.

> - Arnaldo

Sebastian