On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 13:38:25 +0100 Marco Elver <el...@google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 01:18PM +0100, Anders Roxell wrote:
> > When building kfence the following error shows up:
> >
> > In file included from mm/kfence/report.c:13:
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kfence.h: In function ‘kfence_protect_page’:
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kfence.h:12:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function ‘set_memory_valid’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 12 | set_memory_valid(addr, 1, !protect);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Use the correct include both
> > f2b7c491916d ("set_memory: allow querying whether set_direct_map_*() is
> > actually enabled")
> > and 4c4c75881536 ("arm64, kfence: enable KFENCE for ARM64") went in the
>
> Note that -mm does not have stable commit hashes.
>
> > same day via different trees.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.rox...@linaro.org>
> > ---
>
> Ack, we need this patch somewhere but we should probably fix the patch
> that does the move, otherwise we'll have a build-broken kernel still.
>
> > I got this build error in todays next-20201204.
> > Andrew, since both patches are in your -mm tree, I think this can be
> > folded into 4c4c75881536 ("arm64, kfence: enable KFENCE for ARM64")
>
> I don't think that's the right way around. This would result in a
> build-broken commit point as well.
>
> Looking at current -next, I see that "set_memory: allow querying whether
> set_direct_map_*() is actually enabled" is after "arm64, kfence: enable
> KFENCE for ARM64".
>
> I think the patch that introduces set_memory.h for arm64 simply needs to
> squash in this patch (assuming the order is retained as-is in -mm).
>
OK, I requeued this patch as
set_memory-allow-querying-whether-set_direct_map_-is-actually-enabled-fix.patch,
part of Mike's secretmem patch series.
