Hi Jeremy,
Apologies for breaking your build...
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:07:02PM -0400, Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:20:52 +1000
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c: In function
> > 'spufs_parse_options':
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c:623:16: error: incompatible
> > types when assigning to type 'kuid_t' from type 'int' root->i_uid =
> > option; ^ arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c:628:16: error:
> > incompatible types when assigning to type 'kgid_t' from type 'int'
> > root->i_gid = option; ^
> >
> > Caused by commit d6970d4b726c ("enable building user namespace with
> > xfs") from the xfs tree (that was fun to find :-)).
> >
> > I have reverted that commit for today. It could probably be replaced
> > with a patch that just changed XFS_FS to SPU_FS in the
> > UIDGID_CONVERTED config dependency - or someone could fix up SPU_FS.
>
> Hi, (already sent this email based on Intel's kbuild robot this
> morning, sorry for the dup to those who already got it).
>
> Yep this looks to me like SPU_FS should have been in the list of
> stuff that had not been UIDGID_CONVERTED, but reviving
> UIDGID_CONVERTED and adding SPU_FS to it won't work for
> non powerpc arch because SPU_FS = n won't be defined. The following can
> be used to mark it as incompatible with USER_NS:
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/Kconfig
> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/Kconfig index 9978f59..fcf8336 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/Kconfig
> @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ config SPU_FS
> tristate "SPU file system"
> default m
> depends on PPC_CELL
> + depends on USER_NS=n
> select SPU_BASE
> select MEMORY_HOTPLUG
> help
>
> Or if the rest of spufs is already okay for user namespace (I have not
> checked it, but this seems to be the only place it is dealing with
> uid/gid), then the following will fix these particular errors
> (cross-compile tested, but I don't have a powerpc to run test on):
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
> index f390042..90fb308 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
> @@ -620,12 +620,12 @@ spufs_parse_options(struct super_block *sb, char *options, struct inode *root)
> case Opt_uid:
> if (match_int(&args[0], &option))
> return 0;
> - root->i_uid = option;
> + root->i_uid = make_kuid(&init_user_ns, option);
> break;
> case Opt_gid:
> if (match_int(&args[0], &option))
> return 0;
> - root->i_gid = option;
> + root->i_gid = make_kgid(&init_user_ns, option);
> break;
> case Opt_mode:
> if (match_octal(&args[0], &option))
I'd prefer not to break Stephen's tree two days in a row. We could just revert
d6970d4b726c in the xfs tree for the time being as Stephen has done, but given
the choice would prefer the fix. Do you have a preference between the two
approaches that Dwight has posted? The first seems more conservative...
Thanks,
Ben
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
