linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6.1.y] selftests/mm: Move default_huge_page_size to vm

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: <ff0b2bd4-2bb0-4d0b-8a9e-4a712c419331@linux.dev>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 16:08:45 +0800
From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@...ux.dev>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com,
 lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, shuah@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.1.y] selftests/mm: Move default_huge_page_size to
 vm_util.c



On 22/10/25 15:40, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 01:51:38PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
>> Fix the build error:
>>
>> map_hugetlb.c: In function 'main':
>> map_hugetlb.c:79:25: warning: implicit declaration of function 'default_huge_page_size' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
>>    79 |         hugepage_size = default_huge_page_size();
>>       |                         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccYOogvJ.o: in function 'main':
>> map_hugetlb.c:(.text+0x114): undefined reference to 'default_huge_page_size'
>>
>> According to the latest selftests, 'default_huge_page_size' has been
>> moved to 'vm_util.c'. So fix the error by the same way.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@...ux.dev>
>> ---
>>  tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile      |  1 +
>>  tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 24 ------------------------
>>  tools/testing/selftests/vm/vm_util.c     | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>  tools/testing/selftests/vm/vm_util.h     |  1 +
>>  4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> What commit id does this fix?  And again, why not just take the original

Let me check which commit introduced the fix.

> commits instead?

I agree that taking the original commits would be preferable.

However, it might involve quite a few patches to backport, which could
be a bit of work.

If the backport turns out to be too complex, I think it’s acceptable to
leave the build error as-is for now.

Thanks,
Leon

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h