netdev - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the bpf-next 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]

Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 07:55:30 +0200
From:   Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc:     Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the bpf-next tree

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:59 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc perf)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from xsk.c:32:
> libbpf_util.h:49:3: error: #warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h. [-Werror=cpp]
>  # warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
>    ^~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
>   b7e3a28019c9 ("libbpf: remove dependency on barrier.h in xsk.h")
>
> I have applied the following patch for today ... please fix this.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:54:56 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] suppress warning in tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> index 172b707e007b..a54eb2cdbdd6 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_util.h
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ do {                          \
>  # define libbpf_smp_mb() asm volatile("dmb ish" : : : "memory")
>  # define libbpf_smp_rwmb() libbpf_smp_mb()
>  #else
> -# warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
> +//# warning Architecture missing native barrier functions in libbpf_util.h.
>  # define libbpf_smp_rmb() __sync_synchronize()
>  # define libbpf_smp_wmb() __sync_synchronize()
>  # define libbpf_smp_mb() __sync_synchronize()
> --
> 2.20.1
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell

My apologies, I will fix this. I just have two questions first so I do
not mess things up.

* I see my commit in bpf-next but not in bpf. As I submitted it
against bpf, what was the reason it was applied to bpf-next instead?
Unfortunately, I forgot to add "Fixes" tags to the commits, so was
this the reason? I view 4 out of 5 of these patches as bug fixes, the
last one being an optimization.
* Do you want a separate patch for this fix or a V4 of the original
patch set? Against bpf-next or bpf (with Fixes tags)?

Thanks: Magnus