From: Philip Li <philip.li@intel.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>,
Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
<oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2023 17:42:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZU9MdYUBgIhOqevI@rli9-mobl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZU7e2bhGV9NR9THx@rli9-mobl>
+Huacai and Bibo for support.
On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 09:54:33AM +0800, Philip Li wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 04:42:08PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2023-11-08 09:04:40 [+0800], kernel test robot wrote:
> > …
> > Could you please explain what is wrong here? The code in line 73 has no
> > percpu reference at all. Or expects an argument.
>
> Apologize for the confusing report, we will investigate this in earliest
> time to understand what goes wrong. Kindly ignore this and sorry for the noise.
Hi Sebastian, I do a further check and realize this is same as [1], that Steven mentioned
> > 2430 lockdep_assert_preemption_disabled();
The above is a generic lockdep utility. Sounds to me that this is a bug in
the loongarch code that doesn't handle this properly.
So the commit reported is not the actual cause of the issue, which just calls the
preempt_disable_nested and exposes the issue of loongarch.
As for the question "line 73 has nopercpu reference", probably the preempt_disable_nested
is expanded to call lockdep_assert_preemption_disabled, which in turn further calls into
this_cpu_read (because CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT is not set and CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y for this
randconfig).
For now, I will update bot logic to avoid sending similar reports and look for fix
from loongarch side.
Hi Huacai and Bibo, sorry to bother, could you help do a check of [1] and [2], or point
me to the right contact for this sparse warning?
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/20231108094847.236d04b2@gandalf.local.home/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311080409.LlOfTR3m-lkp@intel.com/
Thanks
>
> >
> > > sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got unsigned int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > >> lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void *ptr @@ got int [noderef] __percpu * @@
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: expected void *ptr
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c:73:9: sparse: got int [noderef] __percpu *
> > > lib/flex_proportions.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/mmzone.h, include/linux/gfp.h, include/linux/percpu_counter.h, ...):
> > >
> > > vim +73 lib/flex_proportions.c
> > >
> > > 55
> > > 56 /*
> > > 57 * Declare @periods new periods. It is upto the caller to make sure period
> > > 58 * transitions cannot happen in parallel.
> > > 59 *
> > > 60 * The function returns true if the proportions are still defined and false
> > > 61 * if aging zeroed out all events. This can be used to detect whether declaring
> > > 62 * further periods has any effect.
> > > 63 */
> > > 64 bool fprop_new_period(struct fprop_global *p, int periods)
> > > 65 {
> > > 66 s64 events = percpu_counter_sum(&p->events);
> > > 67
> > > 68 /*
> > > 69 * Don't do anything if there are no events.
> > > 70 */
> > > 71 if (events <= 1)
> > > 72 return false;
> > > > 73 preempt_disable_nested();
> > > 74 write_seqcount_begin(&p->sequence);
> > > 75 if (periods < 64)
> > > 76 events -= events >> periods;
> > > 77 /* Use addition to avoid losing events happening between sum and set */
> > > 78 percpu_counter_add(&p->events, -events);
> > > 79 p->period += periods;
> > > 80 write_seqcount_end(&p->sequence);
> > > 81 preempt_enable_nested();
> > > 82
> > > 83 return true;
> > > 84 }
> > > 85
> > >
> > Sebastian
> >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-11 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-08 1:04 kernel test robot
2023-11-10 15:42 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2023-11-11 1:54 ` Philip Li
2023-11-11 9:42 ` Philip Li [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=ZU9MdYUBgIhOqevI@rli9-mobl \
--to=philip.li@intel.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=chenhuacai@loongson.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=maobibo@loongson.cn \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--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®