netdev - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net tree

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: <20170214091937.GA18546@krava>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2017 10:19:37 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net tree

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 07:42:21AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the net tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64le perf)
> > failed like this:
> > 
> > Warning: tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h differs from kernel
> > bpf.c: In function 'bpf_prog_attach':
> > bpf.c:180:6: error: 'union bpf_attr' has no member named 'attach_flags'; did you mean 'map_flags'?
> >   attr.attach_flags  = flags;
> >       ^
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   7f677633379b ("bpf: introduce BPF_F_ALLOW_OVERRIDE flag")
> > 
> > Unfortunately, the perf header files are kept separate from the kernel
> > header files proper and are not automatically copied over :-(
> 
> No, that's wrong, the problem is not that headers were not shared, the problem is 
> that a tooling interdependency was not properly tested *and* that the dependency 
> was not properly implemented in the build system either.
> 
> Note that we had similar build breakages when include headers _were_ shared as 
> well, so sharing the headers would only have worked around this particular bug and 
> would have introduced fragility in other places...
> 
> The best, most robust solution in this particular case would be to fix the 
> (tooling) build system to express the dependency, that would have shown the build 
> failure right when the modification was done.

so we have the warning now:
  Warning: tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h differs from kernel

do you want to change it into the build failure?

jirka