netdev - Re: [GIT PULL] wireless-next-2026-01-29

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: <f20c64ea4f4a2d3567ab707d98a5164457b02735.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 15:20:53 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] wireless-next-2026-01-29

On Thu, 2026-01-29 at 15:08 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 1/29/26 11:58 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > Here's another set of changes for net-next. Two things to note:
> > 
> >  1) This introduces a couple of new sparse warnings, because it
> >     cannot deal with guard(spinlock_bh)() which the drivers are
> >     now using. I previously fixed sparse for that for RCU, but
> >     given the context tracking work will remove this validation
> >     from sparse entirely, I haven't bothered trying to keep up.

> The CI also report a 32bit build failure, but with a dangling link to
> the actual build results:
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20260129110136.176980-39-johannes@sipsolutions.net/
> 
> so it could be a CI flake, but could you please have a look?

Hmm. My instance didn't report anything at all [1], not even the sparse
warnings (oddly enough), although it had reported the new sparse
warnings due to guard() for the ath PR [2], but not on 32-bit.

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20260129110136.176980-39-johannes@sipsolutions.net/
[2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/65b400ca-8526-4184-ae0b-5e24e41dab9c@oss.qualcomm.com/

I just did a 32-bit build manually, and only see some warnings like
this:
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/util.c:43:45: warning: decimal
constant 2238721139 is between LONG_MAX and ULONG_MAX. For C99 that
means long long, C90 compilers are very likely to produce unsigned long
(and a warning) here

but that's old, this file hasn't been changed in ~11 months. We can get
that fixed, but it's not something the CI should have flagged as "new
warnings".

Sorry, not sure what's going on.

johannes