netdev - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump

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: <20120127084622.a16b0f43e6fcbd029cb1f923@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jan 2012 08:46:22 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	<rdunlap@...otime.net>, <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <gleb@...hat.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump_label, memcg)

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:31:13 +0400 Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
>
> On the specifics of this bug, I verified this config compiles okay in 
> your tree + my patches at the day I last sent them. I also verified it 
> breaks on the tree today.
> 
> The reason seems to be that some other patch tweaked with the header 
> files in an unrelated patch, and the static_branch definition that was 
> getting to us in sock.h, is no longer getting there.
> 
> Including it explicitly fixes it here. I will again pass through a 
> battery of randconfigs on my own, and send you a fix.

Which is one of the reasons we have Rule 1 in Documentation/SubmitChecklist:

1: If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
   that facility.  Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
   that you use.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped