Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp4160678imm; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:38:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpePZY7s9kmmCSY654pzsmUkU1mXImgMkW9a1z67alilz697qifC5jzJLDV5+/uzUSDi3fnH X-Received: by 2002:a62:cd3:: with SMTP id 80-v6mr18788443pfm.184.1532968704717; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:38:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1532968704; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ikscH2sYVDnthxm1+J0oti7HyCKImc29kPnIMwu+EDwpUoZuHqqDYPLENLb/kQTlZL Npnv5HYDN3pN4+aho912ZpamheViz8VajP2sk1A2Lyu6lzbBaSeJDfXTbH351+MfC50k 4D/4fbrbE/cJ85hjr8BGjfeCUnBLmWGcy4p7ZWT5D6uSx4mI4FDOwOHkQXOo84LUnliw brVBQ8BAHqtMCJEDnptXwufI5Da4UITImA7tIVjV4ohbgv4QktrvxgyloCGr8vmGMLPs wkp2d3ECbYc2U/8JuzGwArcJMKxqSldZde0z441q+v4cExCTrHDLRSoxBRXmBDwGaHBz LXDw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=9vAH63narMWP//520NsiT5u2hkNFgjs7e53jvYnuUiw=; b=MfuXI/ZbcVZVw55128kj/FHdOKWD6U0oksiAWWVAVSMHRETgPHHxMWD+gp/se6UQhu Ddl7jvkv6+ij3MsbhVWHgUFhjQaM2YzBl3r5q6sVfSwisfB9KAhk7rVZqj1YyCWlPM0g zXxmp+bhJb80piTfHE/lquL4/dKEhwWIRMxoPG/pylajbg+Fny7dP9fxR9DKGRLz8UBN wMHSjFmzGule4idxY2+UnLtr7M+h6GH/dwwr0dqvrjD3A/1VZnzy/GoiZnKNyemGbbYC YCC6hwuzCPWvBclpNOaltglPbrOr1B5HAewVbDH5X1da1qqRHz2znp2E74eqKmha5jH7 65cg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p9-v6si10202585pgn.164.2018.07.30.09.38.09; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:38:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731699AbeG3SNK (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:13:10 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:42100 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729331AbeG3SNK (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:13:10 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8185180D; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edgewater-inn.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5256F3F5D0; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by edgewater-inn.cambridge.arm.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EA3181AE3096; Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:37:23 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 17:37:23 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Laura Abbott Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Kees Cook , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alexander Popov , Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the kspp tree Message-ID: <20180730163722.GD4276@arm.com> References: <20180727190207.7ce1c9b0@canb.auug.org.au> <20180727190647.3525f5f7@canb.auug.org.au> <20180727205511.7c0f2e62@canb.auug.org.au> <20180727125522.GA6173@arm.com> <20180730173356.694fbf4e@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Laura, On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 07:47:52AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 07/30/2018 12:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 13:55:22 +0100 Will Deacon wrote: > >>On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 08:55:11PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>>Actually, it may have been caused by commit > >>> > >>> 0b3e336601b8 ("arm64: Add support for STACKLEAK gcc plugin") > >>> > >>>from the arm64 tree. > >> > >>Thanks, Stephen. I managed to reproduce this by merging for-next/kspp from > >>Kees's tree and for-next/core from the arm64 tree. The failure happens when > >>building the EFI stub, so the commit you mention above is almost certainly > >>the culprit. > >> > >>We build the stub with the following GCC invocation: > >> > >> gcc -Wp,-MD,drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/.efi-stub-helper.o.d -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.9/include -I./arch/x86/include -I./arch/x86/include/generated -I./include -I./arch/x86/include/uapi -I./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi -I./include/uapi -I./include/generated/uapi -include ./include/linux/kconfig.h -include ./include/linux/compiler_types.h -D__KERNEL__ -mcmodel=small -m64 -D__KERNEL__ -O2 -fPIC -fno-strict-aliasing -mno-red-zone -mno-mmx -mno-sse -fshort-wchar -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING -D__NO_FORTIFY -ffreestanding -fno-stack-protector -fplugin-arg-stackleak_plugin-disable -fno-builtin -DKBUILD_BASENAME='"efi_stub_helper"' -DKBUILD_MODNAME='"efi_stub_helper"' -c -o drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/.tmp_efi-stub-helper.o drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/efi-stub-helper.c > >> > >>so given that we're not passing any -fplugin= option anyway (because we > >>override KBUILD_CFLAGS for the stub), I don't understand why we need > >>to the disable option at all. > >> > >>Laura? > > > >So today I am just trying reverting that arm64 tree commit. > > > > It looks like arm and arm64 start from the KBUILD_CFLAGS and > then filter out vs. x86 which just specifies the CFLAGS individually, > hence x86 picking up the disable when there's no plugin at all. This > seems to be the simplest fix unless we want to change arm64 to not > pick up all the KBUILD_CFLAGS to match x86. That seems like a more > involved process though. If this is okay, I can send a patch > that also sticks a comment in there explaining why fixing on arm64 > is necessary. Indeed, I posted a very similar patch last week! https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAGXu5jJ=0YBYKkQM3=KZRp1o3fT0yGY6-0UDkkit0WenFM3oDg@mail.gmail.com/T/#m1bd3d2de78e33da4d1f496fd82be7cf088ebaa06 If you send a version with a commit message, I'm happy to pick it up. Cheers, Will