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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13853C433E6 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31B8C64DDC for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 31B8C64DDC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DhtkP5XlSz3cPr for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 01:09:49 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=KdURzBzq; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=bauerman@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=KdURzBzq; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Dhtjv5T8fz30HN for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 01:09:22 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 11JE1ld1070546; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:09:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=references : from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=pp1; bh=hEiNmOVPSOEglYa38shUn7O7VSY0u7cREb5g4ai2Ocs=; b=KdURzBzq4H2nTG+I9QyCHkbqIPuNa5JCdpBTrBKO8IiAlSiz2PUyxXwJTRl4FivsiDLx FI5eL2YqxoqOHfGR1uBEeXFa7DqHUCoY7iV1tzwY5M8dWhjjgkEDhdjKy9xreDOyfyJR 8B366w0yoEjLLWpoxwUoHW++jK4ejNhBVl0oYsCNsZ2SdLsVHrB1DhigBHrzt4LG3II4 HU5eGORsBra7GOvDMB92WwcpGOwwr+zJlVn/Eb2038sqXutJaICYHWR8yNftS43nwq9E bYQtLXYzetnr/BacC3Nv+hijh9IoGdDq/fMP6t1r9ZdZJYDm0yBgHbYy2Q1Dc6HW3tqb Dw== Received: from ppma03dal.us.ibm.com (b.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.11]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 36tenqgh49-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 Feb 2021 09:09:02 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 11JE7cI1006622; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:01 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22036.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22036.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.26]) by ppma03dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 36p6da1bb1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:01 +0000 Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.111]) by b01cxnp22036.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 11JE90Rl9437826 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:00 GMT Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5252AC05E; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:09:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24783AC05F; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:08:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from manicouagan.localdomain (unknown [9.85.174.98]) by b01ledav006.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:08:56 +0000 (GMT) References: <20210218223305.2044-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <8b8c0b70-c7ab-33f3-b66c-9ea03388497b@linux.microsoft.com> <87k0r4yi4s.fsf@manicouagan.localdomain> <3ca0aa87-ca83-8024-4067-c2382a360db9@linux.microsoft.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.10; emacs 27.1 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: error: 'const struct kimage' has no member named 'arch' In-reply-to: <3ca0aa87-ca83-8024-4067-c2382a360db9@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 11:08:55 -0300 Message-ID: <87eehcxi88.fsf@manicouagan.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-02-19_05:2021-02-18, 2021-02-19 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2102190109 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: sashal@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mimi Zohar , takahiro.akashi@linaro.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, joe@perches.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Lakshmi Ramasubramanian writes: > On 2/18/21 5:13 PM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> Lakshmi Ramasubramanian writes: >> >>> On 2/18/21 4:07 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: >>> >>> Hi Mimi, >>> >>>> On Thu, 2021-02-18 at 14:33 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote: >>>>> of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt() defined in drivers/of/kexec.c builds >>>>> a new device tree object that includes architecture specific data >>>>> for kexec system call. This should be defined only if the architecture >>>>> being built defines kexec architecture structure "struct kimage_arch". >>>>> >>>>> Define a new boolean config OF_KEXEC that is enabled if >>>>> CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE and CONFIG_OF_FLATTREE are enabled, and >>>>> the architecture is arm64 or powerpc64. Build drivers/of/kexec.c >>>>> if CONFIG_OF_KEXEC is enabled. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian >>>>> Fixes: 33488dc4d61f ("of: Add a common kexec FDT setup function") >>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/of/Kconfig | 6 ++++++ >>>>> drivers/of/Makefile | 7 +------ >>>>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/Kconfig b/drivers/of/Kconfig >>>>> index 18450437d5d5..f2e8fa54862a 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/of/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -100,4 +100,10 @@ config OF_DMA_DEFAULT_COHERENT >>>>> # arches should select this if DMA is coherent by default for OF devices >>>>> bool >>>>> +config OF_KEXEC >>>>> + bool >>>>> + depends on KEXEC_FILE >>>>> + depends on OF_FLATTREE >>>>> + default y if ARM64 || PPC64 >>>>> + >>>>> endif # OF >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/Makefile b/drivers/of/Makefile >>>>> index c13b982084a3..287579dd1695 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/of/Makefile >>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/Makefile >>>>> @@ -13,11 +13,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_OF_RESERVED_MEM) += of_reserved_mem.o >>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_OF_RESOLVE) += resolver.o >>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_OF_OVERLAY) += overlay.o >>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_OF_NUMA) += of_numa.o >>>>> - >>>>> -ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE >>>>> -ifdef CONFIG_OF_FLATTREE >>>>> -obj-y += kexec.o >>>>> -endif >>>>> -endif >>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_OF_KEXEC) += kexec.o >>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST) += unittest-data/ >>>> Is it possible to reuse CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC here? >>>> >>> >>> For ppc64 CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC is selected when CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE is enabled. >>> So I don't see a problem in reusing CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC for ppc. >>> >>> But for arm64, CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC is enabled in the final patch in the patch >>> set (the one for carrying forward IMA log across kexec for arm64). arm64 calls >>> of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt() prior to enabling CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC and hence >>> breaks the build for arm64. >> One problem is that I believe that this patch won't placate the robot, >> because IIUC it generates config files at random and this change still >> allows hppa and s390 to enable CONFIG_OF_KEXEC. > > I enabled CONFIG_OF_KEXEC for s390. With my patch applied, CONFIG_OF_KEXEC is > removed. So I think the robot enabling this config would not be a problem. > >> Perhaps a new CONFIG_HAVE_KIMAGE_ARCH option? Not having that option >> would still allow building kexec.o, but would be used inside kexec.c to >> avoid accessing kimage.arch members. >> > > I think this is a good idea - a new CONFIG_HAVE_KIMAGE_ARCH, which will be > selected by arm64 and ppc for now. I tried this, and it fixes the build issue. > > Although, the name for the new config can be misleading since PARISC, for > instance, also defines "struct kimage_arch". Perhaps, > CONFIG_HAVE_ELF_KIMAGE_ARCH since of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt() is > accessing ELF specific fields in "struct kimage_arch"? Ah, right. I should have digged into the code before making my suggestion. CONFIG_HAVE_KIMAGE_ARCH isn't appropriate, indeed. > > Rob/Mimi - please let us know which approach you think is better. Ah! We can actually use the existing CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC, no? I don't know why I didn't think of it before. -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center