| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <202407132059.uppmW6rR-lkp@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2024 20:41:29 +0800
From: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, thomas.lendacky@....com
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, ravi.bangoria@....com, hpa@...or.com,
rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk, peterz@...radead.org,
james.morse@....com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
j.granados@...sung.com, sibs@...natelecom.cn, nik.borisov@...e.com,
michael.roth@....com, nikunj.dadhania@....com, babu.moger@....com,
x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
santosh.shukla@....com, ananth.narayan@....com,
sandipan.das@....com, manali.shukla@....com, jmattson@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/split_lock: Move Split and Bus lock code to a
dedicated file
Hi Ravi,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on tip/master]
[also build test ERROR on next-20240712]
[cannot apply to tip/x86/core kvm/queue linus/master tip/auto-latest kvm/linux-next v6.10-rc7]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Ravi-Bangoria/x86-split_lock-Move-Split-and-Bus-lock-code-to-a-dedicated-file/20240712-175306
base: tip/master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240712093943.1288-2-ravi.bangoria%40amd.com
patch subject: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/split_lock: Move Split and Bus lock code to a dedicated file
config: i386-randconfig-015-20240713 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240713/202407132059.uppmW6rR-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: gcc-11 (Ubuntu 11.4.0-4ubuntu1) 11.4.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240713/202407132059.uppmW6rR-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/202407132059.uppmW6rR-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c: In function 'split_lock_warn':
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:219:21: error: 'struct task_struct' has no member named 'reported_split_lock'
219 | if (!current->reported_split_lock)
| ^~
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:222:16: error: 'struct task_struct' has no member named 'reported_split_lock'
222 | current->reported_split_lock = 1;
| ^~
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c: At top level:
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:250:6: error: redefinition of 'handle_guest_split_lock'
250 | bool handle_guest_split_lock(unsigned long ip)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:12:
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h:42:20: note: previous definition of 'handle_guest_split_lock' with type 'bool(long unsigned int)' {aka '_Bool(long unsigned int)'}
42 | static inline bool handle_guest_split_lock(unsigned long ip)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:292:6: error: redefinition of 'handle_user_split_lock'
292 | bool handle_user_split_lock(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:12:
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h:37:20: note: previous definition of 'handle_user_split_lock' with type 'bool(struct pt_regs *, long int)' {aka '_Bool(struct pt_regs *, long int)'}
37 | static inline bool handle_user_split_lock(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:300:6: error: redefinition of 'handle_bus_lock'
300 | void handle_bus_lock(struct pt_regs *regs)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:12:
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h:47:20: note: previous definition of 'handle_bus_lock' with type 'void(struct pt_regs *)'
47 | static inline void handle_bus_lock(struct pt_regs *regs) {}
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:401:13: error: redefinition of 'sld_setup'
401 | void __init sld_setup(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
| ^~~~~~~~~
In file included from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c:12:
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h:36:27: note: previous definition of 'sld_setup' with type 'void(struct cpuinfo_x86 *)'
36 | static inline void __init sld_setup(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) {}
| ^~~~~~~~~
vim +219 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bus_lock.c
213
214 static void split_lock_warn(unsigned long ip)
215 {
216 struct delayed_work *work;
217 int cpu;
218
> 219 if (!current->reported_split_lock)
220 pr_warn_ratelimited("#AC: %s/%d took a split_lock trap at address: 0x%lx\n",
221 current->comm, current->pid, ip);
222 current->reported_split_lock = 1;
223
224 if (sysctl_sld_mitigate) {
225 /*
226 * misery factor #1:
227 * sleep 10ms before trying to execute split lock.
228 */
229 if (msleep_interruptible(10) > 0)
230 return;
231 /*
232 * Misery factor #2:
233 * only allow one buslocked disabled core at a time.
234 */
235 if (down_interruptible(&buslock_sem) == -EINTR)
236 return;
237 work = &sl_reenable_unlock;
238 } else {
239 work = &sl_reenable;
240 }
241
242 cpu = get_cpu();
243 schedule_delayed_work_on(cpu, work, 2);
244
245 /* Disable split lock detection on this CPU to make progress */
246 sld_update_msr(false);
247 put_cpu();
248 }
249
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists