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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20260119154624.GFaW5R0M6gTuB09-xb@fat_crate.local>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 16:46:24 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Jürgen 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 Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 03:22:57PM +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> Why do you insist on keeping irqflags.h inconsistent by not defining
> some prototypes if CONFIG_PARAVIRT is set, but not CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL.

The only thing I'm insisting on is proper patch documentation because stable
patches do get looked at by stable folks so it better be clear what we're
fixing.

> Commit 22cc5ca5de52 was just missing the part of my patch. It was wrong.
> Should have moved the "#include <asm/paravirt.h>" from the
> CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL to the CONFIG_PARAVIRT umbrella, just like my
> patch.

So this makes more sense. Your current patch is fixing 22cc5ca5de52. But
nothing breaks currently, only after you switch to including paravirt-base.h
and not the big fat header.

Which means that the patch at the beginning of this thread should be the first
patch in your io set, it should have a Fixes: tag but we should NOT send it to
stable because nothing breaks there.

Your io patchset, at a quick glance, is cleanups so it won't go to stable
either so no need for that fix to go stable either.

Does that sound like a good strategy?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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