From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358FEC61DF7 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:37:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345853AbjKWOhs (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:37:48 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37762 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1345772AbjKWOhq (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:37:46 -0500 Received: from mail.oetec.com (mail.oetec.com [108.160.241.186]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 334731B3; Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.16.35.9] (cpe8c6a8d4d360a-cm8c6a8d4d3608.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.253.151.152]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.oetec.com (8.17.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 3ANEbBDl087792 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:37:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=blastwave.org; s=default; t=1700750233; bh=Ged2w9ywaKuu3NmYHu9HfzcjNR8RiuK6uTXl2aHx/Ns=; h=Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To; b=cdb8TPbAU5ikS4B+YDsJ+ewCPXsdhZCkHZIo6fYRt9yXJbDUmbR1wpSX5ipIhibK7 2St3FO3WsmAY8By+jxTMWwmmfB5iLj+M/N/sIBQn49U27dkx1gIM1a0dOj/3SJlXPn YR0Gk+sobikZiHH4kQoU9VoOCXrR9VZB2FJOmDVhi0zUQPw73lGuzJQF2qSLaxTeri 3Q1CDjhR9BrsdopnT40Z8p9CgF34fVg5oYwga/3C7hcw2It3w+uI9MPNsNImwnFUPc 8Sx8P66vHzCe7Uc/8uUovdYozxbfh+sv3qYuHMj5o865PXqHp9tN5gtzh1+K+WApuf aoW8ZbBuEbrZw== Message-ID: <3f7f1345-5629-5841-e2a9-78c189aecb36@blastwave.org> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:37:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 From: Dennis Clarke Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3a_Fwd=3a_sign-file=2ec=3a149=3a17=3a_warning=3a_impli?= =?UTF-8?Q?cit_declaration_of_function_=e2=80=98ENGINE=5fload=5fbuiltin=5fen?= =?UTF-8?B?Z2luZXPigJk=?= To: Bagas Sanjaya , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Kernel Build System , Linux Kernel Keyrings Cc: David Howells , David Woodhouse , Masahiro Yamada References: <1fca50c4-6d7b-4c9b-bcea-4df17e2c2e7e@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-CA Organization: GENUNIX In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-oetec-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-oetec-MailScanner-ID: 3ANEbBDl087792 X-oetec-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-oetec-MailScanner-From: dclarke@blastwave.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/21/23 23:55, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On 11/17/23 12:34, Dennis Clarke wrote: >> On 11/16/23 18:41, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I notice a bug report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it: >>> >> >>>> Not related to https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215750 but I *feel* that >>>> this code needs a hug. >>> >>> See Bugzilla for the full thread. >>> >>> AFAIK, this looks like a bug when the kernel is compiled against custom >>> (non-system) version of OpenSSL library. >>> >> >> I do not know what you could possibly mean. There is nothing "custom" >> about OpenSSL. For that matter the gcc compiler I am using was also >> built by me. Works fine. The sign-file.c source compiles fine. >> >> It fails to compile in the usual way when trying to build the kernel. >> > > Hi Thorsten and all, > > AFAIK there is no reply from kbuild people (maybe they missed this bug?). I suspect no one is even looking at it. Just us :) > > As for the error itself, let me clarify. The reporter (Dennis) have a build > problem with /usr/local version of OpenSSL library. He installed it > (presumably) alongside with system version (which is installed to /usr), > hence I called the /usr/local version as custom one (IDK if that version > is vanilla OpenSSL or not). Maybe am I missing something? > Well, today we have OpenSSL 3.2.0 published : https://www.openssl.org/source/ So I will try again and this time I will begin with a very stripped down install of Debian stable. When I mean stripped down I mean there will be nothing in the base install except reasonable TCP/IP network support and the ability to FTP a file into it. I can extract a tarball of a decent compiler that I bootstrapped myself with excellent results : https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2023-August/794816.html This will be done on real hardware. Not a virtual machine of any type where that should make no difference at all. Anyone running ESXi would see that same results I am seeing anyways. I want to see if the old sign-file.c code is simply using deprecated calls and then rewrite/patch as needed. This means the OpenSSL involved will be the production 3.2.0 release published today. Dennis Clarke RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC UNIX and Linux spoken