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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83F60F01832 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 13:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4fS6d0688Qz2xqm; Sat, 07 Mar 2026 00:26:44 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1772803604; cv=none; b=lLtlBUjFF/ZxVcj1hDe8HOj+hkz+UMtfn5J9UhZTT1no4J4jvMxuCwBMnHJg+9p5pJxdOZRBTyAGrcKcZ/xSu4uuFV5oZ+R+awNshapl2LqjsrUb53CY7SmxtzRWZDuFxWMAqj/T06f8PTv9zZGx2+PNK3Od2WTofpEwTueKEw1VuetEtRRqqG4920w+M1TlQec6Avs7KUfLugEShSB5GSfu9l9qOAbwVjh33TrZFbiDWV7NSSQwzvI4xpaZ+AsPQQxPXVtBPzfBlU7WongjlA2Wew09bfHya9LJ8NbHjIrQo3o2tYtIhNK0/LkmhaQeU1PAvLXaLo7pYnREllBwdA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1772803604; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=df5ajusRl1mTyz4QEN1b6qe012o5RmwmEQN9zOYMiTo=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=WLDs4yr5UaGYTmCPiF91EGGx8V2sKS4FHvM91DeMcxH5bojSsEC0qPyTwDH8DKw/Y4d+E/YYVIxaam89jw6AfVl1+Xbgoasbf2GUJ+fCLk7W1O6Y1wCVeCRsxnx6QDxzb9B0Mend4bI8qb4Dsmf+RwIS612tDeWatJNG5dp8TJMLmv7LD/YGXK6e72IVzvjbfmdEr/j3wa+v+qk00qoCJUe95wliFOo1Q1v4pnVLMc8JGy2zqFOGpKTxmBvxQQrGDtbIWaHwUu/XGBdzRTqrKax4fQN9iUdb3JgmgSd2v7nEvD8rDE+QE9sibc9GQ7iY8oKovgMDw7gy4wKiVkanzA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=qVqpZu8S; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=chleroy@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=qVqpZu8S; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=chleroy@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4fS6cz6WcNz2xT4 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2026 00:26:43 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3E7A60134; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 13:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92F89C4CEF7; Fri, 6 Mar 2026 13:26:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1772803601; bh=sR/kIGYNND8K9nQw+FjdFBOKIkK/ANUJzx5w8waG85s=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=qVqpZu8S/0TQR7CEKgDfDM8hrU1N4lLByrpecHCFJ9rd9kU2UuFJCwUl8CKVXZxsb Fl/m8BIcs6TvfadSYBelOUxIOjBsO9TSySEvhI9Bw9VxhmMwHNHpBKsr/nf0NpApIE Lzno5NcUDSeRl4qBWWD+UQn3vFc599K7kr7pM+HLyerwq89vH8/qIsW7EMzkXbchZp wXnQcDRO0cNpto62BhoHJjxLyqNV9ovxlNkjrLgMhlD3d9ysgPfbkt2NWUo0i20Ajz n1KwwMzAD0NVYw/WOdaDwVApZdC/YrZqyeFYf92rdOTiyvFay3e02NZvcq4kWQXpTb wTPnLmsZLMXlA== Message-ID: Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2026 14:26:33 +0100 X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] vDSO: Use 32-bit CHECKFLAGS for compat vDSO To: =?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_Wei=C3=9Fschuh?= Cc: "David S. Miller" , Andreas Larsson , Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Arnd Bergmann , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Alexander Gordeev , Christian Borntraeger , Sven Schnelle , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Nicholas Piggin , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, David Laight , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Sun Jian , kernel test robot , Dan Carpenter References: <20260302-vdso-compat-checkflags-v2-0-78e55baa58ba@linutronix.de> <96cdd223-5139-4535-b82d-831dac472cc3@kernel.org> <20260306115350-ef265661-6d6b-4043-9bd0-8e6b437d0d67@linutronix.de> Content-Language: fr-FR From: "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" In-Reply-To: <20260306115350-ef265661-6d6b-4043-9bd0-8e6b437d0d67@linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 06/03/2026 à 14:08, Thomas Weißschuh a écrit : > On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 11:43:24AM +0100, Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) wrote: >> >> >> Le 02/03/2026 à 08:58, Thomas Weißschuh a écrit : >>> When building the compat vDSO the CHECKFLAGS from the 64-bit kernel >>> are used. These are combined with the 32-bit CFLAGS. This confuses >>> sparse, producing false-positive warnings or potentially missing >>> real issues. >>> >>> Manually override the CHECKFLAGS for the compat vDSO with the correct >>> 32-bit configuration. >>> >>> Not all architectures are supported, as many do not use sparse for their >>> (compat) vDSO. These can be enabled later. >>> >>> Also add some checks to bitsperlong.h to detect such issues earlier. >>> >>> Based on tip/timers/vdso. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh >>> --- >>> Changes in v2: >>> - Simplify __BITS_PER_LONG consistency checks >>> - Fix an inconsistency in the powerpc audit code >> >> The powerpc audit code should be replaced by generic >> AUDIT_ARCH_COMPAT_GENERIC, as there is no difference between them >> apparently. > > Agreed. > >> A tentative was made in the past but was declined by audit maintainers >> because we were not able to test it allthought the failure was the same >> before and after the patch, see >> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Flinuxppc%2Fissues%2Fissues%2F412&data=05%7C02%7Cchristophe.leroy%40csgroup.eu%7Cca6c85b42bd44c6a80c608de7b81819d%7C8b87af7d86474dc78df45f69a2011bb5%7C0%7C0%7C639083993321723266%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=VxTy22klpH9H8Altgcthr%2F%2ByUIL6q%2FbBkDV7FQS%2BljI%3D&reserved=0 > > On v7.0-rc1 the test failure of filter_exclude/test is gone. > It also keeps working when applying your patch. Some other tests are > broken, but it looks that is due to missing dependencies on Debian. > So maybe it is time to resubmit your patch. > > In any case, I don't really want to entangle my series with the switch > to AUDIT_ARCH_COMPAT_GENERIC. My proposed cleanup does not make the code > worse and if both patches are applied the conflict will be trivial to > resolve. I didn't mean to interfere with your patch, it is just that your patch reminded me that tentative. Thanks for testing, I will consider re-posting my patch based on your test. Christophe