public inbox for linux-next@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox•net>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore•com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org>
Cc: Blaise Boscaccy <bboscaccy@linux•microsoft.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel•org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel•org>, bpf <bpf@vger•kernel.org>,
	Networking <netdev@vger•kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the security tree
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2026 18:52:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f7892d83-64cb-460f-87c8-ebc7fb4476f4@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhRR4mmkOdWwUCLswmA+_KEjB8RCBBTJ2W4JGiLUWKzxyQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 6/2/26 6:31 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2026 at 12:16 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel•org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> After merging the security tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> /tmp/next/build/security/hornet/hornet_lsm.c:212:36: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 3
>>    212 |                         if (map->ops->map_get_hash(map, SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE, hash))
>>        |                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> /tmp/next/build/include/crypto/sha2.h:14:33: note: expanded from macro 'SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE'
>>     14 | #define SHA256_DIGEST_SIZE      32
>>        |                                 ^
>>
>>
>> Caused by commit
>>
>>    c62310df81899 (lsm: introduce the Hornet LSM)
>>
>> interacting with
>>
>>    c48c3a7e7d5be (bpf: Drop redundant hash_buf from map_get_hash operation)
>>
>> from the bpf-next tree.  I have reverted the latter commit, the new LSM
>> means that the assumption in the changelog that there is only one caller
>> isn't true and it seems like the most straightforward approach.
> 
> Thanks Mark, we're taking a look at it now and should have a
> fix/answer later today.


Sigh, hornet should _not_ be merged to begin with for the many reasons stated.
Messing around with BPF internals is yet another one aside from a really bad
user experience of having multiple approaches to BPF signing !

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-02 16:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-02 16:16 linux-next: build failure after merge of the security tree Mark Brown
2026-06-02 16:31 ` Paul Moore
2026-06-02 16:52   ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2026-06-02 17:26     ` Paul Moore
2026-06-02 18:40   ` Paul Moore
2026-06-02 19:16     ` Mark Brown
2026-06-02 20:13       ` Paul Moore
2026-06-02 21:45       ` Paul Moore
2026-06-03 12:42         ` Mark Brown
2026-06-03 14:43           ` Paul Moore
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-03-24  4:37 Stephen Rothwell
2025-02-10  1:18 Stephen Rothwell
2025-02-10  3:44 ` Paul Moore
2025-02-10  3:53   ` Stephen Rothwell
2025-02-10 14:51     ` Paul Moore
2020-07-08  4:00 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-13  2:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-13  2:06   ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-29 23:35   ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-30  2:35     ` James Morris
2020-07-30  2:59       ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-30  5:03         ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-08-04  3:36         ` James Morris
2019-08-12  4:58 Stephen Rothwell
2019-08-12 17:34 ` Kees Cook
2019-08-19  3:21   ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-08-19  3:38     ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-08-21 16:39     ` James Morris
2017-08-23 11:12 Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-17  2:51 Stephen Rothwell
2017-08-17  3:24 ` Kees Cook
2016-05-19  4:01 Stephen Rothwell
     [not found] ` <20160519140120.23b345a1-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>
2016-05-19 10:11   ` David Howells
2016-05-19 23:14   ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-20  3:07     ` Steve French
2015-08-17  5:29 Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-17  6:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-26 14:45   ` David Howells
2014-07-25  9:21 Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f7892d83-64cb-460f-87c8-ebc7fb4476f4@iogearbox.net \
    --to=daniel@iogearbox$(echo .)net \
    --cc=andrii@kernel$(echo .)org \
    --cc=ast@kernel$(echo .)org \
    --cc=bboscaccy@linux$(echo .)microsoft.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel$(echo .)org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox