Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the kspp tree

Kees Cook
2017-06-16T03:20:47Z

On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-16 at 11:30 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Kees,
>>
>> After merging the kspp tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> In file included from include/linux/bitmap.h:8:0,
>> from include/linux/cpumask.h:11,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/cpumask.h:4,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h:10,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:20,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h:4,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h:52,
>> from include/linux/thread_info.h:37,
>> from arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:6,
>> from include/linux/preempt.h:80,
>> from include/linux/spinlock.h:50,
>> from include/linux/mmzone.h:7,
>> from include/linux/gfp.h:5,
>> from include/linux/slab.h:14,
>> from drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_lnode.c:37:
>> In function 'memcpy',
>> inlined from 'csio_append_attrib' at
>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_lnode.c:248:2,
>> inlined from 'csio_ln_fdmi_dprt_cbfn' at
>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_lnode.c:471:2:
>> include/linux/string.h:309:4: error: call to '__read_overflow2'
>> declared with attribute error: detected read beyond size of object
>> passed as 2nd parameter
>> __read_overflow2();
>> ^
>> In function 'memcpy',
>> inlined from 'csio_append_attrib' at
>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_lnode.c:248:2,
>> inlined from 'csio_ln_fdmi_rhba_cbfn' at
>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_lnode.c:337:2:
>> include/linux/string.h:309:4: error: call to '__read_overflow2'
>> declared with attribute error: detected read beyond size of object
>> passed as 2nd parameter
>> __read_overflow2();
>> ^
>>
>> Caused by commit
>>
>> b90d6eba50d7 ("include/linux/string.h: add the option of fortified
>> string.h functions")
>>
>> I have reverted that commit for today.
>
> That's this one: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/5/9/613, which is in
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkp/scsi.git/ in the
> 4.13/scsi-queue and for-next branches. I think that's why Kees didn't
> include it but I get he needs to add that.

I'm so confused -- isn't this in next? All the build tests I did were
against yesterday's -next which includes this from what I can see...

-Kees

--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security