From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rt-devel:linux-5.15.y-rt-rebase 85/155] drivers/md/raid5.c:2222:20: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 12:42:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211011104257.tyxo5pm4jln3a7ng@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202110092249.dDmDslZ6-lkp@intel.com>
On 2021-10-09 22:20:57 [+0800], kernel test robot wrote:
> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
> >> drivers/md/raid5.c:2222:20: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct spinlock [usertype] *lock @@ got struct spinlock [noderef] __percpu * @@
> drivers/md/raid5.c:2222:20: sparse: expected struct spinlock [usertype] *lock
> drivers/md/raid5.c:2222:20: sparse: got struct spinlock [noderef] __percpu *
> drivers/md/raid5.c:2281:22: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct spinlock [usertype] *lock @@ got struct spinlock [noderef] __percpu * @@
> drivers/md/raid5.c:2281:22: sparse: expected struct spinlock [usertype] *lock
> drivers/md/raid5.c:2281:22: sparse: got struct spinlock [noderef] __percpu *
I think the code itself is correct but sparse got confused by the
definition of the struct. Defining raid5_percpu on its own makes the
warning go away:
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid5.h b/drivers/md/raid5.h
--- a/drivers/md/raid5.h
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5.h
@@ -559,6 +559,17 @@ struct r5pending_data {
struct bio_list bios;
};
+/* per cpu variables */
+struct raid5_percpu {
+ spinlock_t lock; /* Protection for -RT */
+ struct page *spare_page; /* Used when checking P/Q in raid6 */
+ void *scribble; /* space for constructing buffer
+ * lists and performing address
+ * conversions
+ */
+ int scribble_obj_size;
+};
+
struct r5conf {
struct hlist_head *stripe_hashtbl;
/* only protect corresponding hash list and inactive_list */
@@ -634,15 +645,7 @@ struct r5conf {
*/
int recovery_disabled;
/* per cpu variables */
- struct raid5_percpu {
- spinlock_t lock; /* Protection for -RT */
- struct page *spare_page; /* Used when checking P/Q in raid6 */
- void *scribble; /* space for constructing buffer
- * lists and performing address
- * conversions
- */
- int scribble_obj_size;
- } __percpu *percpu;
+ struct raid5_percpu __percpu *percpu;
int scribble_disks;
int scribble_sectors;
struct hlist_node node;
The RCU warnings look valid since there are __rcu annotations.
Sebastian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-11 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-09 14:20 kernel test robot
2021-10-11 10:42 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
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=20211011104257.tyxo5pm4jln3a7ng@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®