On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 8:48 PM Mickaël Salaün <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Masahiro, > > What is the status of this patch? Could you please push it to -next? > This would avoid emails from lkp: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/[email protected]/
Hmm, I also want to know the answer. This is the *third* time that I resent this patch to the x86 ML. This is a territory of the x86 subsystem because it is only touching arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h It is preferred to get this in via the x86 tree. x86 Maintainers, could you take a look please? > Thanks, > Mickaël > > On 01/03/2021 14:15, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > Building kernel/sys_ni.c with W=1 emits tons of -Wmissing-prototypes > > warnings. > > > > $ make W=1 kernel/sys_ni.o > > [ snip ] > > CC kernel/sys_ni.o > > In file included from kernel/sys_ni.c:10: > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:83:14: warning: no previous > > prototype for '__x64_sys_io_setup' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > 83 | __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > > | ^~ > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:100:2: note: in expansion of macro > > '__COND_SYSCALL' > > 100 | __COND_SYSCALL(x64, sys_##name) > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:256:2: note: in expansion of macro > > '__X64_COND_SYSCALL' > > 256 | __X64_COND_SYSCALL(name) \ > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > kernel/sys_ni.c:39:1: note: in expansion of macro 'COND_SYSCALL' > > 39 | COND_SYSCALL(io_setup); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:83:14: warning: no previous > > prototype for '__ia32_sys_io_setup' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > 83 | __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > > | ^~ > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:120:2: note: in expansion of macro > > '__COND_SYSCALL' > > 120 | __COND_SYSCALL(ia32, sys_##name) > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:257:2: note: in expansion of macro > > '__IA32_COND_SYSCALL' > > 257 | __IA32_COND_SYSCALL(name) > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > kernel/sys_ni.c:39:1: note: in expansion of macro 'COND_SYSCALL' > > 39 | COND_SYSCALL(io_setup); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ... > > > > __SYS_STUB0() and __SYS_STUBx() defined a few lines above have forward > > declarations. Let's do likewise for __COND_SYSCALL() to fix the > > warnings. > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]> > > Tested-by: Mickaël Salaün <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > > b/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > > index a84333adeef2..80c08c7d5e72 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > > @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ extern long __ia32_sys_ni_syscall(const struct pt_regs > > *regs); > > } > > > > #define __COND_SYSCALL(abi, name) \ > > + __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused); \ > > __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > > { \ > > return sys_ni_syscall(); \ > > -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
