| 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: <14E46687CBDB8037+8f5455b2-89a5-483b-902d-c6977ee71b02@uniontech.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:51:20 +0800
From: yushengjin <yushengjin@...ontech.com>
To: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, pablo@...filter.org
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev, kadlec@...filter.org, roopa@...dia.com,
razor@...ckwall.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
coreteam@...filter.org, bridge@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net/bridge: Optimizing read-write locks in ebtables.c
在 24/9/2024 下午3:43, kernel test robot 写道:
> Hi yushengjin,
>
> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on netfilter-nf/main]
> [also build test ERROR on horms-ipvs/master linus/master v6.11 next-20240924]
> [cannot apply to nf-next/master]
> [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/yushengjin/net-bridge-Optimizing-read-write-locks-in-ebtables-c/20240924-102547
> base:https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netfilter/nf.git main
> patch link:https://lore.kernel.org/r/2860814445452DE8%2B20240924022437.119730-1-yushengjin%40uniontech.com
> patch subject: [PATCH v2] net/bridge: Optimizing read-write locks in ebtables.c
> config: sh-allmodconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240924/202409241543.F99I82u3-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: sh4-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.1.0
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240924/202409241543.F99I82u3-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/202409241543.F99I82u3-lkp@intel.com/
>
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> In file included from include/asm-generic/percpu.h:7,
> from ./arch/sh/include/generated/asm/percpu.h:1,
> from include/linux/irqflags.h:19,
> from arch/sh/include/asm/cmpxchg-irq.h:5,
> from arch/sh/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:20,
> from arch/sh/include/asm/atomic.h:19,
> from include/linux/atomic.h:7,
> from include/asm-generic/bitops/atomic.h:5,
> from arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h:23,
> from include/linux/bitops.h:68,
> from include/linux/thread_info.h:27,
> from include/asm-generic/preempt.h:5,
> from ./arch/sh/include/generated/asm/preempt.h:1,
> from include/linux/preempt.h:79,
> from include/linux/spinlock.h:56,
> from include/linux/mmzone.h:8,
> from include/linux/gfp.h:7,
> from include/linux/umh.h:4,
> from include/linux/kmod.h:9,
> from net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:14:
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c: In function 'get_counters':
>>> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1006:30: error: 'ebt_recseq' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'xt_recseq'?
> 1006 | s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:219:54: note: in definition of macro '__verify_pcpu_ptr'
> 219 | const void __percpu *__vpp_verify = (typeof((ptr) + 0))NULL; \
> | ^~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:263:49: note: in expansion of macro 'VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR'
> 263 | #define per_cpu_ptr(ptr, cpu) ({ (void)(cpu); VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR(ptr); })
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:269:35: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu_ptr'
> 269 | #define per_cpu(var, cpu) (*per_cpu_ptr(&(var), cpu))
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1006:22: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu'
> 1006 | s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1006:30: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> 1006 | s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:219:54: note: in definition of macro '__verify_pcpu_ptr'
> 219 | const void __percpu *__vpp_verify = (typeof((ptr) + 0))NULL; \
> | ^~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:263:49: note: in expansion of macro 'VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR'
> 263 | #define per_cpu_ptr(ptr, cpu) ({ (void)(cpu); VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR(ptr); })
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:269:35: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu_ptr'
> 269 | #define per_cpu(var, cpu) (*per_cpu_ptr(&(var), cpu))
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1006:22: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu'
> 1006 | s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c: In function 'do_replace_finish':
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1111:42: error: 'ebt_recseq' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'xt_recseq'?
> 1111 | seqcount_t *s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:219:54: note: in definition of macro '__verify_pcpu_ptr'
> 219 | const void __percpu *__vpp_verify = (typeof((ptr) + 0))NULL; \
> | ^~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:263:49: note: in expansion of macro 'VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR'
> 263 | #define per_cpu_ptr(ptr, cpu) ({ (void)(cpu); VERIFY_PERCPU_PTR(ptr); })
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:269:35: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu_ptr'
> 269 | #define per_cpu(var, cpu) (*per_cpu_ptr(&(var), cpu))
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c:1111:34: note: in expansion of macro 'per_cpu'
> 1111 | seqcount_t *s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> | ^~~~~~~
>
>
> vim +1006 net/bridge/netfilter/ebtables.c
>
> 987
> 988
> 989 static void get_counters(const struct ebt_counter *oldcounters,
> 990 struct ebt_counter *counters, unsigned int nentries)
> 991 {
> 992 int i, cpu;
> 993 struct ebt_counter *counter_base;
> 994 seqcount_t *s;
> 995
> 996 /* counters of cpu 0 */
> 997 memcpy(counters, oldcounters,
> 998 sizeof(struct ebt_counter) * nentries);
> 999
> 1000 /* add other counters to those of cpu 0 */
> 1001 for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> 1002
> 1003 if (cpu == 0)
> 1004 continue;
> 1005
>> 1006 s = &per_cpu(ebt_recseq, cpu);
> 1007 counter_base = COUNTER_BASE(oldcounters, nentries, cpu);
> 1008 for (i = 0; i < nentries; i++) {
> 1009 u64 bcnt, pcnt;
> 1010 unsigned int start;
> 1011
> 1012 do {
> 1013 start = read_seqcount_begin(s);
> 1014 bcnt = counter_base[i].bcnt;
> 1015 pcnt = counter_base[i].pcnt;
> 1016 } while (read_seqcount_retry(s, start));
> 1017
> 1018 ADD_COUNTER(counters[i], bcnt, pcnt);
> 1019 cond_resched();
> 1020 }
> 1021 }
> 1022 }
> 1023
Sorry, it's my fault, I will test it again.
> -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists