linux-kernel - Re: perf usage of arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h

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: <aFK72GUlT-EStfU2@x1>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 10:15:04 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>,
	Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
	yangyicong@...ilicon.com, James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Ali Saidi <alisaidi@...zon.com>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	yangjinqian <yangjinqian1@...wei.com>,
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: perf usage of arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 12:24:40PM +0100, Leo Yan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:52:53AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > If we want to share headers between userspace and kernel, we should
> > refactor those headers such that this is safe by construction.

> > There is no need to update the userspace headers just because the kernel
> > headers have changed, so the simple solution in the short term is to
> > suppress the warning from check-headers.sh.
 
> Sure, makes sense for me.
> 
> @Arnaldo, as Mark suggested, do you want me to send a patch to remove
> cputype.h checking in check-headers.sh or it is fine to keep the warning
> until finish the header refactoring?

It is ok to have the warning, its just this one at this point and it is
serving its purpose.

When the refactoring gets done, it will go away. Think of it as a
reminder :-)

- Arnaldo