On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 09:08:35PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 08/06/25 at 05:26pm, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > > I found mm-new build fails when CONFIG_KASAN is unset as below, and 'git > > > bisect' points this patch. > > > > Yup just hit this + bisected here. > > Sorry for the trouble and thanks for reporting.
No worries! > > > > > > > > > LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > > > ld: lib/stackdepot.o:(__jump_table+0x8): undefined reference to > > > `kasan_flag_enabled' > > > > > > Since kasna_flag_enabled is defined in mm/kasan/common.c, I confirmed > > > diff like > > > below fixes this. I think it may not be a correct fix though, since I > > > didn't > > > read this patchset thoroughly. > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kasan-enabled.h b/include/linux/kasan-enabled.h > > > index b5857e15ef14..a53d112b1020 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/kasan-enabled.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/kasan-enabled.h > > > @@ -8,11 +8,22 @@ extern bool kasan_arg_disabled; > > > > > > DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(kasan_flag_enabled); > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_KASAN > > > + > > > > Shouldn't we put this above the static key declaration? > > > > Feels like the whole header should be included really. > > You are right, kasan_flag_enabled should be included in CONFIG_KASAN > ifdeffery scope. Firstly I _LOVE_ the term 'ifdeffery scope'. Fantastic :) > > Since CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS depends on CONFIG_KASAN, we may not need > include below CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS ifdeffery into CONFIG_KASAN ifdeffery > scope. Not sure if this is incorrect. Well I don't think CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS is necessarily implied right? So these should remain I think, just nested in CONFIG_KASAN, should be fine. > > Thanks a lot for checking this. No problem! Just ran in to it while doing other stuff in mm-new :) Cheers, Lorenzo
