Re: [PATCH 5.15 00/69] 5.15.141-rc1 review

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Fri Dec 01 2023 - 03:21:41 EST


On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 12:11:31PM -0600, Daniel Díaz wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 11:44, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 11/30/23 09:21, Daniel Díaz wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > Lots of failures everywhere:
> > > * clang-17-lkftconfig arm64
> > > * clang-17-lkftconfig arm64
> > > * clang-17-lkftconfig arm64
> > > * clang-lkftconfig arm64
> > > * clang-lkftconfig arm
> > > * clang-lkftconfig i386
> > > * clang-lkftconfig x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-64k_page_size arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-64k_page_size arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-armv8_features arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug-kmemleak arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug-kmemleak arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug-kmemleak i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-debug-kmemleak x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-devicetree arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kasan arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kasan arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kasan x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kselftest arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kselftest-kernel arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kselftest-kernel arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kselftest-kernel i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kunit arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kunit arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kunit arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kunit i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-kunit x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-libgpiod arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-libgpiod arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-libgpiod i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-libgpiod x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-perf arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-perf-kernel arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-perf-kernel arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-perf-kernel i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-perf-kernel x86_64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-rcutorture arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-rcutorture arm64
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-rcutorture arm
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-rcutorture i386
> > > * gcc-12-lkftconfig-rcutorture x86_64
> > >
> > > It's essentially this:
> > >
> > > -----8<-----
> > > make --silent --keep-going --jobs=8
> > > O=/home/tuxbuild/.cache/tuxmake/builds/1/build ARCH=x86_64 SRCARCH=x86
> > > CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-linux-gnu- 'CC=sccache x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc'
> > > 'HOSTCC=sccache gcc'
> > > arch/x86/kernel/smp.o: warning: objtool: sysvec_reboot()+0x51:
> > > unreachable instruction
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.o: in function
> > > `__trace_kprobe_create':
> > > trace_kprobe.c:(.text+0x2f39): undefined reference to
> > > `kallsyms_on_each_symbol'
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.o: in function
> > > `create_local_trace_kprobe':
> > > trace_kprobe.c:(.text+0x384b): undefined reference to
> > > `kallsyms_on_each_symbol'
> > > make[1]: *** [/builds/linux/Makefile:1227: vmlinux] Error 1
> > > make[1]: Target '__all' not remade because of errors.
> > > make: *** [Makefile:226: __sub-make] Error 2
> > > make: Target '__all' not remade because of errors.
> > > ----->8-----
> > >
> > > It only affects 5.15. Bisection in progress.
> >
> > I guess it will point to
> >
> > >> Francis Laniel <flaniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> tracing/kprobes: Return EADDRNOTAVAIL when func matches several symbols
>
> It sure did!:
>
> commit 7b4375c36a4c0e1b4b97ccbcdd427db5a460e04f
> Author: Francis Laniel <flaniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri Oct 20 13:42:49 2023 +0300
>
> tracing/kprobes: Return EADDRNOTAVAIL when func matches several symbols
>
> commit b022f0c7e404887a7c5229788fc99eff9f9a80d5 upstream.
>
> Reverting that commit made the build pass again.

{sigh}

Francis, I think this is the second or third time this has happened with
the attempt to get this patch merged. I'm going to go drop it from all
of the pending stable queues again, and please, if you wish to have it
applied in the future, I am going to have to see some proof it was
actually tested on the architectures that it keeps breaking.

thanks,

greg k-h