Stephen Rothwell | 1 Jan 01:03 2010
Picon
Picon

linux-next: agp tree build failure

Hi all,

Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c: In function '__exittest':
drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c:782: error: 'agp_amd64_cleanup' undeclared (first use in this function)

Caused by commit f405d2c02395a74d3883bd03ded36457aa3697ad ("x86/agp: Fix
agp_amd64_init() initialization with CONFIG_GART_IOMMU enabled") from the
origin tree interacting with commit
e85c5c6542528aba88a5d811652cf0e2d44f7f07 ("drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c:
squish warning") from the agp tree.

I reverted the agp tree commit.
--

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Peter Dolding | 1 Jan 01:12 2010
Picon

Re: [RFC][PATCH v3] Unprivileged: Disable raising of privileges

On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 3:06 AM, Alan Cox <alan <at> lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> Lets step back for a moment.  What is the common issue with both.
>>
>> The issue is simple.  "How to I generically tell the secuirty system
>> want particular restrictions."
>
> You don't. It's not "the security system", its a whole collection of
> completely different models of security and differing tools.
>
>> There is no generic LSM API for application or users to talk to the
>> LSM and say I want the following restricted.
>
> That's a meaningless observation I think because security doesn't work
> that way. Removing specific features from a specific piece of code
> generally isn't a security feature - its only meaningful in the context
> of a more general policy and that policy expression isn't generic.
>
Sandboxing it has meaning.  The LSM section of the Linux secuirty
system is out of reach of applications to talk to generically.  They
can use capabilities they can use DAC they can even talk generically
to the firewall.

>> To control the LSM the applications are expected to know what the LSM.
>>  This has caused items like chrome major issues.
>
> ..
>
>> Application does not need to be informed what is disabled from it.
>
> So why does it cause chrome problems ?
(Continue reading)

Linus Torvalds | 1 Jan 01:34 2010

Re: linux-next: origin tree build warning


On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> Today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig) produced this warning:
> 
> drivers/pci/quirks.c: In function 'pci_dev_specific_reset':
> drivers/pci/quirks.c:2699: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> 
> Introduced by commit 5b889bf237fca383b5807ad69fde3ad1e2287e42 ("PCI: Fix
> build if quirks are not enabled").

Does this trivial patch get rid of it?

		Linus
---
 drivers/pci/quirks.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/quirks.c b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
index 5c449fc..c746943 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/quirks.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
 <at>  <at>  -2694,7 +2694,7  <at>  <at>  static const struct pci_dev_reset_methods pci_dev_reset_methods[] = {

 int pci_dev_specific_reset(struct pci_dev *dev, int probe)
 {
-	struct pci_dev_reset_methods *i;
+	const struct pci_dev_reset_methods *i;

 	for (i = pci_dev_reset_methods; i->reset; i++) {
(Continue reading)

Stephen Rothwell | 1 Jan 01:42 2010
Picon
Picon

linux-next: origin tree build warnings

Hi all,

Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) produced these warnings:

drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c: In function 'twl4030_sih_do_edge':
drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:571: warning: passing argument 1 of 'spin_lock_irq' from incompatible
pointer type
include/linux/spinlock.h:304: note: expected 'struct spinlock_t *' but argument is of type 'struct
raw_spinlock_t *'
drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:576: warning: passing argument 1 of 'spin_unlock_irq' from incompatible
pointer type
include/linux/spinlock.h:329: note: expected 'struct spinlock_t *' but argument is of type 'struct
raw_spinlock_t *'

Introduced by commit 239007b8440abff689632f50cdf0f2b9e895b534 ("genirq:
Convert irq_desc.lock to raw_spinlock").  I guess that this file was
missed in the conversion.
--

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Linus Torvalds | 1 Jan 01:50 2010

Re: linux-next: origin tree build warnings


On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) produced these warnings:
> 
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c: In function 'twl4030_sih_do_edge':
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:571: warning: passing argument 1 of 'spin_lock_irq' from incompatible
pointer type
> include/linux/spinlock.h:304: note: expected 'struct spinlock_t *' but argument is of type 'struct
raw_spinlock_t *'
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:576: warning: passing argument 1 of 'spin_unlock_irq' from incompatible
pointer type
> include/linux/spinlock.h:329: note: expected 'struct spinlock_t *' but argument is of type 'struct
raw_spinlock_t *'
> 
> Introduced by commit 239007b8440abff689632f50cdf0f2b9e895b534 ("genirq:
> Convert irq_desc.lock to raw_spinlock").  I guess that this file was
> missed in the conversion.

Ok, I tested and committed the other warning you pointed out, but this one 
I can't test since I no longer do powerpc builds. I assume the trivial fix 
below fixes it, but without testing I won't be committing it.

		Linus
---
 drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c
index 20d29ba..9df9a5a 100644
(Continue reading)

Stephen Rothwell | 1 Jan 02:02 2010
Picon
Picon

Re: linux-next: origin tree build warning

Hi Linus,

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:34:37 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <torvalds <at> linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig) produced this warning:
>
> Does this trivial patch get rid of it?

Yep.

Tested-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au>

I did actually get this warning for all sorts of configs/architectures,
obviously, I just reported it against the first that popped up.

--

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Stephen Rothwell | 1 Jan 02:04 2010
Picon
Picon

Re: linux-next: Tree for December 31 (kgdb)

Hi Jason,

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:20:02 -0800 Tony Luck <tony.luck <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The kgdb bits break ia64 (and any other architecture without an
> <asm/kgdb.h> too):
> 
> In file included from include/drm/drm_fb_helper.h:33,
>                  from include/drm/drm_crtc_helper.h:42,
>                  from drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c:30:
> include/linux/kgdb.h:21:22: error: asm/kgdb.h: No such file or directory
> In file included from include/drm/drm_fb_helper.h:33,
>                  from include/drm/drm_crtc_helper.h:42,
>                  from drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_device.c:30:
> include/linux/kgdb.h:86: error: 'BREAK_INSTR_SIZE' undeclared here
> (not in a function)

I have used the version of the kgdb tree from next-20091230 for today
(effectively dropping it), sorry.

--

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Stephen Rothwell | 1 Jan 02:07 2010
Picon
Picon

linux-next: Tree for January 1

Hi all,

Happy New Year! :-)

This one has also not had the build testing *between* merges, but has had
all the normal build testing at the end.There may be more unbisectable
points in the tree then usual.

Changes since 20091231:

The net tree lost its conflict.

The kgdb tree gained build failures for several architectures, so I used
the version from next-20091230.

The agp tree gained a build failure for which I reverted a commit.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have created today's linux-next tree at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
(patches at http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/next/ ).  If you
are tracking the linux-next tree using git, you should not use "git pull"
to do so as that will try to merge the new linux-next release with the
old one.  You should use "git fetch" as mentioned in the FAQ on the wiki
(see below).

You can see which trees have been included by looking in the Next/Trees
file in the source.  There are also quilt-import.log and merge.log files
in the Next directory.  Between each merge, the tree was built with
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 1 Jan 02:16 2010
Picon

Re: linux-next: origin tree build warning

On Friday 01 January 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Linus,
> 
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:34:37 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds <torvalds <at> linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Jan 2010, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig) produced this warning:
> >
> > Does this trivial patch get rid of it?
> 
> Yep.
> 
> Tested-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr <at> canb.auug.org.au>
> 
> I did actually get this warning for all sorts of configs/architectures,
> obviously, I just reported it against the first that popped up.

Sorry for that, should have double checked.

Rafael
Jun Sun | 1 Jan 02:16 2010
Picon

Re: [PATCH] Valid relocation symbol for FLAT format on ARM

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 01:52:08PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:36, Jun Sun wrote:
> > Apparently newer GCC would generate ANCHOR symbols beyond the end of
> > data/bss segment on ARM CPUs. As a result, the exiting validity checking
> > for relocation symbols in FLAT format will fail.
> >
> > This also fixes a cosmetic error in printk. Text segment and data/bss
> > segment are allocated from two different areas. It is not meaningful to
> > give the diff between them in error reporting messages.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jun Sun <jsun <at> junsun.net>
> >
> > diff -Nru linux-2.6.32.2/arch/arm/include/asm/flat.h.orig linux-2.6.32.2/arch/arm/include/asm/flat.h
> 
> you really should use git to generate the patch.  if you're going to
> do it by hand, you need to format it correctly.  you're missing the
> --- marker between your change log and the start of the patch.
> 
> > --- linux-2.6.32.2/fs/binfmt_flat.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.32.2/fs/binfmt_flat.c
> >  <at>  <at>  -355,7 +355,7  <at>  <at> 
> >
> > ?? ?? ?? ??if (!flat_reloc_valid(r, start_brk - start_data + text_len)) {
> > ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??printk("BINFMT_FLAT: reloc outside program 0x%x (0 - 0x%x/0x%x)",
> > - ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??(int) r,(int)(start_brk-start_code),(int)text_len);
> > + ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??(int) r,(int)(start_brk-start_data+text_len),(int)text_len);
> > ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??goto failed;
> > ?? ?? ?? ??}
> 
> this should be a separate patch since it is unrelated to your other change
(Continue reading)


Gmane