Hi,
Can you direct me to the owner/decision maker? We’d like to send you
more clients to help you grow your business.
We can deliver to you real time, exclusive and consistent leads of people
looking for your business.
Who would be the right person to call, and what is the best number to reach
them on?
Thank you!
Laura Gevins
Hi,
Can you direct me to the owner/decision maker? We’d like to send you
more clients to help you grow your business.
We can deliver to you real time, exclusive and consistent leads of people
looking for your business.
Who would be the right person to call, and what is the best number to reach
them on?
Thank you!
Laura Gevins
objtool points out a condition that it does not like:
lib/ubsan.o: warning: objtool: __ubsan_handle_type_mismatch()+0x4a: call to stackleak_track_stack() with UACCESS enabled
lib/ubsan.o: warning: objtool: __ubsan_handle_type_mismatch_v1()+0x4a: call to stackleak_track_stack() with UACCESS enabled
I guess this is related to the call ubsan_type_mismatch_common()
not being inline before it calls user_access_restore(), though
I don't fully understand why that is a problem.
Marking the function inline shuts up the warning and might be
the right thing to do. The patch that caused this is marked
for stable backports, so this one should probably be backported
as well.
Fixes: 42440c1f9911 ("lib/ubsan: add type mismatch handler for new GCC/Clang")
Cc: stable(a)vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd(a)arndb.de>
---
lib/ubsan.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/ubsan.c b/lib/ubsan.c
index ecc179338094..3d8836f0fc5c 100644
--- a/lib/ubsan.c
+++ b/lib/ubsan.c
@@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static void handle_object_size_mismatch(struct type_mismatch_data_common *data,
ubsan_epilogue(&flags);
}
-static void ubsan_type_mismatch_common(struct type_mismatch_data_common *data,
+static __always_inline void ubsan_type_mismatch_common(struct type_mismatch_data_common *data,
unsigned long ptr)
{
unsigned long flags = user_access_save();
--
2.20.0
Hi Sasha,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 05:30:35PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [This is an automated email]
>
> This commit has been processed because it contains a "Fixes:" tag,
> fixing commit: 9cdc0108baa8 arm64: ssbd: Add prctl interface for per-thread mitigation.
>
> The bot has tested the following trees: v5.1.10, v4.19.51, v4.14.126, v4.9.181.
>
> v5.1.10: Build OK!
> v4.19.51: Build OK!
> v4.14.126: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> Unable to calculate
>
> v4.9.181: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
> Unable to calculate
I just looked at the 4.14 and 4.9 branches, and their backport of ssbd
already includes this patch, so that's OK.
Regards,
Anisse