From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757861AbaITVBz (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:01:55 -0400 Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:41354 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755372AbaITVBx (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:01:53 -0400 Message-ID: <541DEB33.2070508@roeck-us.net> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 14:01:39 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Helge Deller , Stephen Rothwell CC: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 19 References: <20140919165817.225eb8b8@canb.auug.org.au> <20140919191514.GA5358@roeck-us.net> <541DD754.4040000@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <541DD754.4040000@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated_sender: linux@roeck-us.net X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-CTCH-PVer: 0000001 X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A020201.541DEB41.0036,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-CTCH-Rules: X-CTCH-SenderID: linux@roeck-us.net X-CTCH-SenderID-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalMessages: 2 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSpam: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalSuspected: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalConfirmed: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalBulk: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalVirus: 0 X-CTCH-SenderID-TotalRecipients: 0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - bh-25.webhostbox.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - roeck-us.net X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: bh-25.webhostbox.net: mailgid no entry from get_relayhosts_entry X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/20/2014 12:36 PM, Helge Deller wrote: > Hi Günter, > > On 09/19/2014 09:15 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 04:58:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Changes since 20140917: >>> >>> The fsl tree still had its build failure so I used the version from >>> next-20140917. >>> >>> The v4l-dvb tree lost its build failure. >>> >>> The security tree gained a conflict against the file-locks tree. >>> >>> Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 6014 >>> 5488 files changed, 217522 insertions(+), 129375 deletions(-) >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >> parisc:defconfig, parisc:generic-32bit_defconfig: >> >> -------------- >> Error log: >> arch/parisc/kernel/ptrace.c: In function 'do_syscall_trace_enter': >> arch/parisc/kernel/ptrace.c:274:2: error: implicit declaration of function >> 'secure_computing' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors >> make[1]: *** [arch/parisc/kernel/ptrace.o] Error 1 >> >> Bisect points to commit 273299fb6380 ('Merge branch 'x86/seccomp') which >> obviously doesn't help much. Suspected culprit is c90f06943e05 ('parisc: Wire up >> seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create syscalls') which seems to be missing an >> include file. > > I could not reproduce this error with current git head. > With next-20140919 ? > Nevertheless, it probably makes sense to #include in ptrace.c to > avoid a dependency on other header files to include it instead. > I've added this patch to my for-next tree: > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/deller/parisc-linux.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=0f18557b017b3469e1f8edf5cf34c1cba856fdbe > > Could you try again? > That doesn't solve the problem for me, most likely because HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER is not set for parisc in next-20140919. This is what seccomp.h does with it: #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER static inline int secure_computing(void) { return 0; } #else static inline void secure_computing_strict(int this_syscall) { return; } #endif You don't have this flag in your tree. It was introduced in -next with commit 'seccomp,x86,arm,mips,s390: Remove nr parameter from secure_computing'. Guenter