[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFL8i4Uraaw9390B@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 20:51:07 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: avoid struct return in lock_stats()
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 10:17:32PM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 11:29:21AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >
> > Returning a large structure from the lock_stats() function causes clang
> > to have multiple copies of it on the stack and copy between them, which
> > can end up exceeding the frame size warning limit:
> >
> > kernel/locking/lockdep.c:300:25: error: stack frame size (1464) exceeds limit (1280) in 'lock_stats' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than]
> > 300 | struct lock_class_stats lock_stats(struct lock_class *class)
> >
> > Change the calling conventions to directly operate on the caller's copy,
> > which apparently is what gcc does already.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> Queued for more tests and reviews, thanks!
What about this one:
lockdep: change 'static const' variables to enum values
?
(I can't quickly find the pointer right now, but I think in lore.kernel.org you can find it)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists