"Invalid signature" issue on dev kernel launch
Aruna Hewapathirane
aruna.hewapathirane at gmail.com
Wed Mar 24 09:21:31 EDT 2021
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 1:26 AM Valdis Klētnieks <valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu>
wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 22:36:33 -0400, Aruna Hewapathirane said:
>
> > I also see:
> > CC drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.o
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c: In function ‘od_set_powersave_bias’:
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c:446:1: warning: the frame size of 1032
> > bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
> > 446 | }
> > | ^
> > This is what causes the compile time errors with possible missing
> firmware
>
> No it's not. That's just a *warning* and doesn't stop the build. The
> reason
> that we have that warning is because on most architectures, the entire
> kernel
> stack has to fit into 2 contiguous 4k pages.
>
> Oh dear that's right it does not stop the build what was I thinking ..
> And a perfectly legal stack can be something like TCP delivering an NFS
> packet
> which then goes to the NFS code, which then hands it off to the VFS layer,
> which checks the page cache, which hands it off to XFS, which schedules
> I/O to
> the filesystem, which gets handed to the block subsystem, which realizes
> that
> the target partition is an LVM partition, and LVM realizes that the
> "physical
> volume" is actually a dm-crypt, and then dm-crypt does some cryptography
> and
> calls the block subsystem to write to the physical disk. Feel free to
> check the code
> path yourself... :)
>
>
Oh my... and oh dear ( again! )
> And all of that has to fit in 8K of stack. That's why we warn when things
> have
> a large stack frame entry.
>
I still don't understand why the 8K barrier ? Why can't we make it say 16K
?
>
> Anyhow, "possible missing firmware" isn't even at compile time - it's
> during
> the build of the initramfs at *install* time. And the most likely cause of
> that is that missing external firmware that's not GPL - it's all confined
> to 2
> graphics drivers - amdgpu and i915, so not at all related to a warning
> against
> cpufreq...
>
> Understood and my apologies :-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20210324/e9c04aff/attachment.html>
More information about the Kernelnewbies
mailing list