From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH - linux-next] ARM: ptrace: Fix audit caused compile error Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 13:30:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20120221133044.GN22562@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1329825855-11902-1-git-send-email-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> <20120221131616.GI19696@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:37463 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754718Ab2BUNbj (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:31:39 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120221131616.GI19696@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Will Deacon Cc: Peter Ujfalusi , Stephen Rothwell , Eric Paris , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-audit@redhat.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Nathaniel Husted On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 01:16:17PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:04:15PM +0000, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > > While trying to compile the kernel for ARM (omap2plus_defconfig) th= e kernel > > build fails with: > >=20 > > arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.c: In function =E2=80=98syscall_trace=E2=80=99= : > > arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.c:920:3: error: implicit declaration of func= tion =E2=80=98audit_syscall_exit=E2=80=99 > > arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.c:922:3: error: implicit declaration of func= tion =E2=80=98audit_syscall_entry=E2=80=99 > > arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.c:922:23: error: =E2=80=98AUDIT_ARCH_ARMEB=E2= =80=99 undeclared (first use in this function) > > arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.c:922:23: note: each undeclared identifier i= s reported only once for each function it appears in > > make[1]: *** [arch/arm/kernel/ptrace.o] Error 1 > >=20 > > The issue created by commit: > > 29ef73b7 Kernel: Audit Support For The ARM Platform > >=20 > > We need to include the linux/audit.h header to the arch/arm/kernel/= ptrace.c > > file to be able to compile the kernel. >=20 > This was already reported and I think Russell was going to revert the > offending commit, since it needed some rework to handle little-endian > configurations. >=20 > I can't see the revert in any of the trees I'm tracking though... I never pushed that out because I thought someone was going to fix it. Were any patches produced to fix it? I can't see anything in the patch system and I couldn't see anything on the list. It seems the previous thread about it just died. Oh well, I guess a revert is what's required after all.