linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/irqflags: Fix build failure

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20260115174553.GGaWkn0bDNq_RomeI1@fat_crate.local>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 18:45:53 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/irqflags: Fix build failure

On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 05:10:14PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> When building with CONFIG_PARAVIRT, but without CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL,
> a build failure might happen due to arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h
> only including asm/paravirt.h when CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is set.
> 
> This was spotted when testing a patch removing the
> "#include <asm/paravirt.h>" from another header.
> 
> Fixes: 22cc5ca5de52 ("x86/paravirt: Move halt paravirt calls under CONFIG_PARAVIRT")
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601152203.plJOoOEF-lkp@intel.com/

So this got reported against a patchset which is not upstream yet, yet your
Fixes: points to a patch from ~year ago.

The right thing to do would be to take *that* fix and prepend your
not-upstrea-yet set with it.

Also, why does *this* fix need to go to all kernels which contain the patch in
Fixes?

All this sounds weird.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette