[PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[Serge E. Hallyn]

overflowuid and overflowgid were exported twice.  Remove the export
from s390_ksyms.c

Signed-off-by: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>

---

 arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c |    2 --
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

b89fdbbb0859c2ed03246a822e278bf9a31ae054
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c b/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
index 4176c77..0886e73 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
@@ -46,8 +46,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__down_interruptible);
  */
 extern int dump_fpu (struct pt_regs * regs, s390_fp_regs *fpregs);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(dump_fpu);
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(overflowuid);
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(overflowgid);
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(empty_zero_page);
 
 /*
-- 
1.1.6

Re: [PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[Dave Jones]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:31:41PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
 > overflowuid and overflowgid were exported twice.  Remove the export
 > from s390_ksyms.c

There's a gotcha with this.  in kernel/sys.c, we only export those
symbols if CONFIG_UID16 is set.  iirc, there was some part of
arch/s390 that expected to use those symbols even if it wasn't set.

Does everything still link with that option both set and unset ?

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

Re: [PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Dave Jones (davej@redhat.com):
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:31:41PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>  > overflowuid and overflowgid were exported twice.  Remove the export
>  > from s390_ksyms.c
> 
> There's a gotcha with this.  in kernel/sys.c, we only export those
> symbols if CONFIG_UID16 is set.  iirc, there was some part of
> arch/s390 that expected to use those symbols even if it wasn't set.
> 
> Does everything still link with that option both set and unset ?

It does on my partition; near as I can tell the only use of overflowuid
is in compat_linux.c, which is always compiled in.

Nevertheless a #ifndef CONFIG_UID16 is probably more appropriate?

thanks,
-serge

Re: [PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[Heiko Carstens]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:48:12PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dave Jones (davej@redhat.com):
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:31:41PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> >  > overflowuid and overflowgid were exported twice.  Remove the export
> >  > from s390_ksyms.c
> > 
> > There's a gotcha with this.  in kernel/sys.c, we only export those
> > symbols if CONFIG_UID16 is set.  iirc, there was some part of
> > arch/s390 that expected to use those symbols even if it wasn't set.
> > 
> > Does everything still link with that option both set and unset ?
> 
> It does on my partition; near as I can tell the only use of overflowuid
> is in compat_linux.c, which is always compiled in.

arch/s390/kernel/binfmt_elf32.c which can be build as a module uses this too.
But only with the two NEW_TO_OLD_UID and NEW_TO_OLD_GID defines which seem
to be unused and could be removed as well.

Re: [PATCH] s390: fix duplicate export of overflow{ug}id

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Serge E. Hallyn (serue@us.ibm.com):
> overflowuid and overflowgid were exported twice.  Remove the export
> from s390_ksyms.c
> 
> Signed-off-by: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
> 
> ---
> 
>  arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c |    2 --
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> b89fdbbb0859c2ed03246a822e278bf9a31ae054
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c b/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
> index 4176c77..0886e73 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/s390_ksyms.c
> @@ -46,8 +46,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__down_interruptible);
>   */
>  extern int dump_fpu (struct pt_regs * regs, s390_fp_regs *fpregs);
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(dump_fpu);
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(overflowuid);
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(overflowgid);
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(empty_zero_page);

Hmm, ok, I see that this only happens when I have a busted .config
(and have no idea how CONFIG_UID16 came to be set).

I assume CONFIG_UID16 is not a valid option for s390?  If that's the
case, then please ignore.  If it is, then instead of removing these
we should probably put them in #ifndef CONFIG_UID16?

thanks,
-serge