linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] misc: throttler: Add core support for non-thermal throttling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <201806091253.WIqGeJmb%fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Date:   Sat, 9 Jun 2018 12:34:24 +0800
From:   kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
To:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Cc:     kbuild-all@...org, MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
        Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] misc: throttler: Add core support for
 non-thermal throttling

Hi Matthias,

I love your patch! Yet something to improve:

[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.17 next-20180608]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system]

url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Matthias-Kaehlcke/Add-throttler-driver-for-non-thermal-throttling/20180609-061437
config: openrisc-allmodconfig (attached as .config)
compiler: or1k-linux-gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 20160327 (experimental)
reproduce:
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # save the attached .config to linux build tree
        make.cross ARCH=openrisc 

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

   drivers/misc/throttler/core.c: In function 'thr_cpufreq_update_policy':
>> drivers/misc/throttler/core.c:417:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'cpufreq_update_policy' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
      cpufreq_update_policy(cftd->cpu);
      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   cc1: some warnings being treated as errors

vim +/cpufreq_update_policy +417 drivers/misc/throttler/core.c

   391	
   392	static void thr_cpufreq_update_policy(struct throttler *thr)
   393	{
   394		struct cpufreq_thrdev *cftd;
   395	
   396		WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&thr->lock));
   397	
   398		list_for_each_entry(cftd, &thr->cpufreq.list, node) {
   399			struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cftd->cpu);
   400	
   401			if (!policy) {
   402				dev_warn(thr->dev,
   403					 "CPU%d does have no cpufreq policy!\n",
   404					 cftd->cpu);
   405				continue;
   406			}
   407	
   408			/*
   409			 * The lock isn't really needed in this function, the list
   410			 * of cpufreq devices can be extended, but no items are
   411			 * deleted during the lifetime of the throttler. Releasing
   412			 * the lock is necessary since cpufreq_update_policy() ends
   413			 * up calling thr_handle_cpufreq_event(), which needs to
   414			 * acquire the lock.
   415			 */
   416			mutex_unlock(&thr->lock);
 > 417			cpufreq_update_policy(cftd->cpu);
   418			mutex_lock(&thr->lock);
   419	
   420			cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
   421		}
   422	}
   423	

---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure                Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all                   Intel Corporation

Download attachment ".config.gz" of type "application/gzip" (44421 bytes)