[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87edctwr6y.ffs@tglx>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 22:57:41 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arjan van
de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:698:16: sparse: sparse:
incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
On Sat, Mar 02 2024 at 04:12, kernel test robot wrote:
> FYI, the error/warning was bisected to this commit, please ignore it
> if it's irrelevant.
I have no idea to which previous thread you are replying to because your
mail lacks any references.
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> head: 87adedeba51a822533649b143232418b9e26d08b
> commit: 6e29032340b60f7aa7475c8234b17273e4424007 x86/cpu: Move cpu_l[l2]c_id into topology info
> date: 5 months ago
> config: i386-randconfig-062-20240301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240302/202403020457.RCJoQ3ts-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240302/202403020457.RCJoQ3ts-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202403020457.RCJoQ3ts-lkp@intel.com/
>
> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>
> vim +698 arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
>
> 695
> 696 static inline u16 per_cpu_llc_id(unsigned int cpu)
> 697 {
> > 698 return per_cpu(cpu_info.topo.llc_id, cpu);
> 699 }
> 700
This is bogus and I looked at another related bogosity today:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/202403010704.oGQZPu0P-lkp@intel.com
which has similar complaints.
So I went and downloaded the config and followed the reproduction
instructions except for one detail.
The only difference is the sparse version:
1) I had the regular debian variant installed.
Version: 0.6.4 (Debian: 0.6.4-3)
2) I updated my sparse clone and rebuilt
Version: v0.6.4-66-g0196afe16a50
Neither one of them exposed the problem, but you are using:
sparse version: v0.6.4-66-g0196afe1-dirty
which is obviously based on the latest upstream tree, but seems to have
some extra muck on top which I don't know what it is.
Does this reproduce with an unpatched upstream sparse for you?
If so then I'm really curious why it does not reproduce here.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists