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: <e7d2c719-ca43-4d8f-a20a-df22b5bdd585@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 17:02:22 +0100
From: Jürgen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
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 19.01.26 16:46, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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?
> 

Fine with me.

I'll change the commit message to:

   Commit 22cc5ca5de52 ("x86/paravirt: Move halt paravirt calls under
   CONFIG_PARAVIRT") moved some paravirt hooks from the CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL
   umbrella to CONFIG_PARAVIRT, but missed to move the associated
   "#include <asm/paravirt.h>" in irqflags.h from CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL to
   CONFIG_PARAVIRT.

   This hasn't resulted in build failures yet, as all use cases of irqflags.h
   had paravirt.h included via other header files, even without
   CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL being set.

   In order to allow changing those other header files, e.g. by no longer
   including paravirt.h, fix irqflags.h by moving inclusion of paravirt.h
   under the CONFIG_PARAVIRT umbrella.

Is that fine with you?

Juergen

Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3684 bytes)

Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (496 bytes)