- Kernel - mailweb.openeuler.org

[PATCH OLK-5.10] iio: light: vcnl4035: fix information leak in triggered buffer
by Huang Xiaojia 10 Feb '25

10 Feb '25

From: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz(a)gmail.com> mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.13-rc7 commit 47b43e53c0a0edf5578d5d12f5fc71c019649279 category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/IBIQVN CVE: CVE-2024-57910 Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?… -------------------------------- The 'buffer' local array is used to push data to userspace from a triggered buffer, but it does not set an initial value for the single data element, which is an u16 aligned to 8 bytes. That leaves at least 4 bytes uninitialized even after writing an integer value with regmap_read(). Initialize the array to zero before using it to avoid pushing uninitialized information to userspace. Cc: stable(a)vger.kernel.org Fixes: ec90b52c07c0 ("iio: light: vcnl4035: Fix buffer alignment in iio_push_to_buffers_with_timestamp()") Signed-off-by: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz(a)gmail.com> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20241125-iio_memset_scan_holes-v1-6-0cb6e98d895c@g… Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron(a)huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Huang Xiaojia <huangxiaojia2(a)huawei.com> --- drivers/iio/light/vcnl4035.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4035.c b/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4035.c index 6e38a33f55c7..ce21c0fcd1c0 100644 --- a/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4035.c +++ b/drivers/iio/light/vcnl4035.c @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static irqreturn_t vcnl4035_trigger_consumer_handler(int irq, void *p) struct iio_dev *indio_dev = pf->indio_dev; struct vcnl4035_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev); /* Ensure naturally aligned timestamp */ - u8 buffer[ALIGN(sizeof(u16), sizeof(s64)) + sizeof(s64)] __aligned(8); + u8 buffer[ALIGN(sizeof(u16), sizeof(s64)) + sizeof(s64)] __aligned(8) = { }; int ret; ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, VCNL4035_ALS_DATA, (int *)buffer); -- 2.34.1

2 1

[PATCH openEuler-1.0-LTS] brd: fix AA deadlock for concurrent brd_probe()
by Yu Kuai 10 Feb '25

10 Feb '25

hulk inclusion category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/issues/IBIWBN CVE: NA ---------------------------------------- For concurrent brd_probe(), the first one will create brd disk and set partition number to 0, however, the second one will found the brd disk and keep the partition number as disk fist minor. This will case AA deadlock for the caller because bdev is part0 while bdev->bd_partno is not zero. Fix the problem by always return NULL in brd_probe, hence brd_probe() will be covered by exact_match() from __device_add_disk(). Fixes: 937af5ecd059 ("brd: Fix all partitions BUGs") Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3(a)huawei.com> --- drivers/block/brd.c | 23 +++++------------------ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/block/brd.c b/drivers/block/brd.c index 02e8fff3f828..fc1abcf760ad 100644 --- a/drivers/block/brd.c +++ b/drivers/block/brd.c @@ -418,15 +418,13 @@ static void brd_free(struct brd_device *brd) kfree(brd); } -static struct brd_device *brd_init_one(int i, bool *new) +static void brd_init_one(int i) { struct brd_device *brd; - *new = false; - list_for_each_entry(brd, &brd_devices, brd_list) { + list_for_each_entry(brd, &brd_devices, brd_list) if (brd->brd_number == i) - goto out; - } + return; brd = brd_alloc(i); if (brd) { @@ -434,9 +432,6 @@ static struct brd_device *brd_init_one(int i, bool *new) add_disk(brd->brd_disk); list_add_tail(&brd->brd_list, &brd_devices); } - *new = true; -out: - return brd; } static void brd_del_one(struct brd_device *brd) @@ -448,19 +443,11 @@ static void brd_del_one(struct brd_device *brd) static struct kobject *brd_probe(dev_t dev, int *part, void *data) { - struct brd_device *brd; - struct kobject *kobj; - bool new; - mutex_lock(&brd_devices_mutex); - brd = brd_init_one(MINOR(dev) / max_part, &new); - kobj = brd ? get_disk_and_module(brd->brd_disk) : NULL; + brd_init_one(MINOR(dev) / max_part); mutex_unlock(&brd_devices_mutex); - if (new) - *part = 0; - - return kobj; + return NULL; } static inline void brd_check_and_reset_par(void) -- 2.39.2

2 1

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/page_alloc.c:3684:54: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types)
by kernel test robot 10 Feb '25

10 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 9b6c51cd780588813c5d327e2a6d677d010a2b6f [1420/1420] mm: fix zoneref mapping problem in memory reliable config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250210/202502100112.IwK7UXyM-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250210/202502100112.IwK7UXyM-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502100112.IwK7UXyM-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/page_alloc.c:140:1: sparse: sparse: symbol 'pcpu_drain_mutex' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/page_alloc.c:141:1: sparse: sparse: symbol '__pcpu_scope_pcpu_drain' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/page_alloc.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/mm.h): include/linux/mem_reliable.h:68:15: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:4656:13: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:4661:35: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/page_alloc.c:4661:35: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/page_alloc.c:4661:35: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/page_alloc.c:4677:35: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/page_alloc.c:4677:35: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/page_alloc.c:4677:35: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/page_alloc.c:4683:35: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/page_alloc.c:4683:35: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/page_alloc.c:4683:35: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/page_alloc.c:4698:35: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/page_alloc.c:4698:35: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/page_alloc.c:4698:35: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/page_alloc.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/mm.h): include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:324:27: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:324:27: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:3683:14: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:3684:45: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer >> mm/page_alloc.c:3684:54: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) @@ expected restricted gfp_t [usertype] flags @@ got unsigned int @@ mm/page_alloc.c:3684:54: sparse: expected restricted gfp_t [usertype] flags mm/page_alloc.c:3684:54: sparse: got unsigned int include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:3701:14: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c: In function 'mem_init_print_info': mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 36- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7516:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7516 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: note: use '&__init_begin[0] <= &_sinittext[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 42- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7516:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7516 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 48- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7516:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7516 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: note: use '&_sinittext[0] < &__init_end[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 54- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7516:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7516 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 60- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7518:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7518 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: note: use '&_stext[0] <= &_sinittext[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 66- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7518:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7518 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 72- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7518:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7518 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: note: use '&_sinittext[0] < &_etext[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 78- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7518:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7518 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 84- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7519:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7519 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: note: use '&_sdata[0] <= &__init_begin[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 90- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7519:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7519 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 96- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7519:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7519 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: note: use '&__init_begin[0] < &_edata[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 102- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7519:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7519 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 108- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7520:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7520 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:27: note: use '&_stext[0] <= &__start_rodata[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 114- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7520:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7520 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 120- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7520:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7520 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7512:41: note: use '&__start_rodata[0] < &_etext[0]' to compare the addresses 7512 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 126- | ^ vim +3684 mm/page_alloc.c 3673 3674 #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_RELIABLE 3675 static inline void reliable_fb_find_zone(gfp_t gfp_mask, 3676 struct alloc_context *ac) 3677 { 3678 if (!reliable_allow_fb_enabled()) 3679 return; 3680 3681 /* dst node don't have zone we want, fallback here */ 3682 if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE) && (ac->high_zoneidx == ZONE_NORMAL) && 3683 (gfp_mask & ___GFP_RELIABILITY)) { > 3684 ac->high_zoneidx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask & ~___GFP_RELIABILITY); 3685 ac->preferred_zoneref = first_zones_zonelist( 3686 ac->zonelist, ac->high_zoneidx, ac->nodemask); 3687 } 3688 3689 return; 3690 } 3691 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/mem_reliable.c:401:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write' was not declared. Should it be static?
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 6943b93b464351cbc35aa002e86bac48e08b1c3f [1420/1420] mm: add support for limiting the usage of reliable memory in pagecache config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092339.Fe6S9ctM-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092339.Fe6S9ctM-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502092339.Fe6S9ctM-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/mem_reliable.c:39:1: sparse: sparse: symbol '__pcpu_scope_pagecache_reliable_pages' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:67:14: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/mem_reliable.c:250:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:323:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_debug_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:356:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_reserve_size_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:380:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? >> mm/mem_reliable.c:401:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write' was not declared. Should it be static? >> mm/mem_reliable.c:487:14: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/mem_reliable.c:487:14: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/mem_reliable.c:487:14: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/mem_reliable.c:491:14: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: &= mm/mem_reliable.c:491:14: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/mem_reliable.c:491:14: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/mem_reliable.c:250:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 250 | int reliable_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:323:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_debug_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 323 | int reliable_debug_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:356:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_reserve_size_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 356 | int reliable_reserve_size_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:380:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 380 | int reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:401:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 401 | int reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vim +/reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write +401 mm/mem_reliable.c 400 > 401 int reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write(struct ctl_table *table, int write, 402 void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos) 403 { 404 unsigned long old_value = reliable_pagecache_max_bytes; 405 int ret; 406 407 ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos); 408 if (!ret && write) { 409 if (reliable_pagecache_max_bytes > total_reliable_mem_sz()) { 410 reliable_pagecache_max_bytes = old_value; 411 return -EINVAL; 412 } 413 } 414 415 return ret; 416 } 417 418 static struct ctl_table reliable_ctl_table[] = { 419 { 420 .procname = "task_reliable_limit", 421 .data = &task_reliable_limit, 422 .maxlen = sizeof(task_reliable_limit), 423 .mode = 0644, 424 .proc_handler = reliable_limit_handler, 425 }, 426 { 427 .procname = "reliable_debug", 428 .data = &mem_reliable_ctrl_bits, 429 .maxlen = sizeof(mem_reliable_ctrl_bits), 430 .mode = 0600, 431 .proc_handler = reliable_debug_handler, 432 }, 433 { 434 .procname = "reliable_reserve_size", 435 .data = &sysctl_reliable_reserve_size, 436 .maxlen = sizeof(sysctl_reliable_reserve_size), 437 .mode = 0644, 438 .proc_handler = reliable_reserve_size_handler, 439 }, 440 #ifdef CONFIG_SHMEM 441 { 442 .procname = "shmem_reliable_bytes_limit", 443 .data = &sysctl_shmem_reliable_bytes_limit, 444 .maxlen = sizeof(sysctl_shmem_reliable_bytes_limit), 445 .mode = 0644, 446 .proc_handler = reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler, 447 }, 448 #endif 449 { 450 .procname = "reliable_pagecache_max_bytes", 451 .data = &reliable_pagecache_max_bytes, 452 .maxlen = sizeof(reliable_pagecache_max_bytes), 453 .mode = 0644, 454 .proc_handler = reliable_pagecache_max_bytes_write, 455 .extra1 = &zero, 456 }, 457 {} 458 }; 459 460 static struct ctl_table reliable_dir_table[] = { 461 { 462 .procname = "vm", 463 .maxlen = 0, 464 .mode = 0555, 465 .child = reliable_ctl_table, 466 }, 467 {} 468 }; 469 470 void page_cache_prepare_alloc(gfp_t *gfp) 471 { 472 long nr_reliable = 0; 473 int cpu; 474 475 if (!mem_reliable_is_enabled()) 476 return; 477 478 for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) 479 nr_reliable += this_cpu_read(pagecache_reliable_pages); 480 481 if (nr_reliable < 0) 482 goto no_reliable; 483 484 if (nr_reliable > reliable_pagecache_max_bytes >> PAGE_SHIFT) 485 goto no_reliable; 486 > 487 *gfp |= ___GFP_RELIABILITY; 488 return; 489 490 no_reliable: 491 *gfp &= ~___GFP_RELIABILITY; 492 } 493 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/mem_reliable.c:349:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static?
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 7a36955e5c8808a4b45d826a127e136c97f2a6f8 [1420/1420] mm: Introduce shmem mirrored memory limit for memory reliable config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092233.9edRdxQm-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092233.9edRdxQm-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502092233.9edRdxQm-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/mem_reliable.c:63:14: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/mem_reliable.c:219:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:292:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_debug_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:325:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_reserve_size_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? >> mm/mem_reliable.c:349:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:219:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 219 | int reliable_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:292:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_debug_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 292 | int reliable_debug_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:325:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_reserve_size_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 325 | int reliable_reserve_size_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:349:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 349 | int reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vim +/reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler +349 mm/mem_reliable.c 348 > 349 int reliable_shmem_bytes_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, 350 void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos) 351 { 352 unsigned long *data_ptr = (unsigned long *)(table->data); 353 unsigned long old = *data_ptr; 354 int ret; 355 356 ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos); 357 if (ret == 0 && write) { 358 if (*data_ptr > total_reliable_mem_sz()) { 359 *data_ptr = old; 360 return -EINVAL; 361 } 362 363 shmem_reliable_nr_page = *data_ptr >> PAGE_SHIFT; 364 } 365 366 return ret; 367 } 368 #endif 369 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/mem_reliable.c:272:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_debug_handler' was not declared. Should it be static?
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 851a3ff0b4de68403c9a344c3d5378aa590705b7 [1420/1420] mm: Introduce proc interface to control memory reliable features config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092003.Ptadb8Sw-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502092003.Ptadb8Sw-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502092003.Ptadb8Sw-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/mem_reliable.c:52:14: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/mem_reliable.c:199:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? >> mm/mem_reliable.c:272:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_debug_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:199:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 199 | int reliable_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/mem_reliable.c:272:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_debug_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 272 | int reliable_debug_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vim +/reliable_debug_handler +272 mm/mem_reliable.c 271 > 272 int reliable_debug_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, 273 void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos) 274 { 275 unsigned long old_ctrl_bits, new_ctrl_bits; 276 static DEFINE_MUTEX(reliable_debug_mutex); 277 int ret; 278 279 mutex_lock(&reliable_debug_mutex); 280 old_ctrl_bits = mem_reliable_ctrl_bits; 281 ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos); 282 if (ret == 0 && write) { 283 if (mem_reliable_ctrl_bits > (1 << CTRL_BITS_SHIFT) - 1) { 284 mem_reliable_ctrl_bits = old_ctrl_bits; 285 mutex_unlock(&reliable_debug_mutex); 286 287 return -EINVAL; 288 } 289 290 new_ctrl_bits = mem_reliable_ctrl_bits; 291 mem_reliable_ctrl_bits = old_ctrl_bits; 292 if (!!test_bit(MEM_RELIABLE_ALL, &new_ctrl_bits)) 293 mem_reliable_parse_ctrl_bits(new_ctrl_bits); 294 else 295 mem_reliable_disable_all(); 296 } 297 298 mutex_unlock(&reliable_debug_mutex); 299 300 return ret; 301 } 302 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/shmem.c:1601:19: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |=
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 3a3a1f75d885bc1d1a25bb753dd2cf9111c457f7 [1420/1420] shmem: Introduce shmem reliable config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091809.4Ney4Px5-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091809.4Ney4Px5-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502091809.4Ney4Px5-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/shmem.c:688:9: sparse: sparse: self-comparison always evaluates to false >> mm/shmem.c:1601:19: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/shmem.c:1601:19: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/shmem.c:1601:19: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/shmem.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/percpu_counter.h, include/linux/quota.h, include/linux/fs.h): include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer vim +1601 mm/shmem.c 1595 1596 static inline void shmem_prepare_alloc(gfp_t *gfp_mask) 1597 { 1598 if (!shmem_reliable_is_enabled()) 1599 return; 1600 > 1601 *gfp_mask |= ___GFP_RELIABILITY; 1602 } 1603 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] mm/mem_reliable.c:126:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static?
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 1845e7add95773a24019fb72bbea24a0a568663b [1420/1420] mm: Add reliable memory use limit for user tasks config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091601.sH0xhPOM-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091601.sH0xhPOM-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502091601.sH0xhPOM-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) >> mm/mem_reliable.c:126:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'reliable_limit_handler' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/mem_reliable.c:126:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'reliable_limit_handler' [-Wmissing-prototypes] 126 | int reliable_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vim +/reliable_limit_handler +126 mm/mem_reliable.c 124 125 #ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL > 126 int reliable_limit_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write, 127 void __user *buffer, size_t *length, loff_t *ppos) 128 { 129 unsigned long old = task_reliable_limit; 130 int ret; 131 132 ret = proc_doulongvec_minmax(table, write, buffer, length, ppos); 133 if (ret == 0 && write) { 134 if (task_reliable_limit > total_reliable_mem_sz()) { 135 task_reliable_limit = old; 136 return -EINVAL; 137 } 138 } 139 140 return ret; 141 } 142 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1420/1420] include/linux/mem_reliable.h:41:15: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: 33d1f46ad98ea3a13752a6360d97732ab4e119b9 [1420/1420] mm: Introduce memory reliable config: arm64-randconfig-r131-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091527.Cexj3y4I-lkp@…) compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0 reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091527.Cexj3y4I-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502091527.Cexj3y4I-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) mm/page_alloc.c:140:1: sparse: sparse: symbol 'pcpu_drain_mutex' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/page_alloc.c:141:1: sparse: sparse: symbol '__pcpu_scope_pcpu_drain' was not declared. Should it be static? mm/page_alloc.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/mm.h): >> include/linux/mem_reliable.h:41:15: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:4572:13: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c:4573:27: sparse: sparse: invalid assignment: |= mm/page_alloc.c:4573:27: sparse: left side has type restricted gfp_t mm/page_alloc.c:4573:27: sparse: right side has type unsigned int mm/page_alloc.c: note: in included file (through include/linux/mm.h): include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:324:27: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:324:27: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer include/linux/gfp.h:457:34: sparse: sparse: restricted gfp_t degrades to integer mm/page_alloc.c: In function 'mem_init_print_info': mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 20- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7377:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7377 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: note: use '&__init_begin[0] <= &_sinittext[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 26- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7377:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7377 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 32- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7377:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7377 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: note: use '&_sinittext[0] < &__init_end[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 38- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7377:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7377 | adj_init_size(__init_begin, __init_end, init_data_size, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 44- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7379:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7379 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: note: use '&_stext[0] <= &_sinittext[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 50- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7379:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7379 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 56- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7379:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7379 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: note: use '&_sinittext[0] < &_etext[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 62- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7379:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7379 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, _sinittext, init_code_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 68- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7380:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7380 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: note: use '&_sdata[0] <= &__init_begin[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 74- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7380:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7380 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 80- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7380:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7380 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: note: use '&__init_begin[0] < &_edata[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 86- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7380:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7380 | adj_init_size(_sdata, _edata, datasize, __init_begin, init_data_size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 92- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7381:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7381 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:27: note: use '&_stext[0] <= &__start_rodata[0]' to compare the addresses 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 98- | ^~ mm/page_alloc.c:7381:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7381 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ mm/page_alloc.c:7373:41: warning: comparison between two arrays [-Warray-compare] 7373 | if (start <= pos && pos < end && size > adj) 104- | ^ mm/page_alloc.c:7381:9: note: in expansion of macro 'adj_init_size' 7381 | adj_init_size(_stext, _etext, codesize, __start_rodata, rosize); vim +41 include/linux/mem_reliable.h 31 32 static inline bool skip_none_movable_zone(gfp_t gfp, struct zoneref *z) 33 { 34 if (!mem_reliable_is_enabled()) 35 return false; 36 37 if (!current->mm || (current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) 38 return false; 39 40 /* user tasks can only alloc memory from non-mirrored region */ > 41 if (!(gfp & ___GFP_RELIABILITY) && (gfp & __GFP_HIGHMEM) && 42 (gfp & __GFP_MOVABLE)) { 43 if (zonelist_zone_idx(z) < ZONE_MOVABLE) 44 return true; 45 } 46 47 return false; 48 } 49 #else 50 #define reliable_enabled 0 51 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0

[openeuler:openEuler-1.0-LTS 1421/1421] drivers/edac/skx_base.o: warning: objtool: skx_decode()+0x27b: can't find switch jump table
by kernel test robot 09 Feb '25

09 Feb '25

tree: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel.git openEuler-1.0-LTS head: cc7cb040bd0afe96f1da94c9f21eda5a986510a5 commit: e34047f6dc606c123911c6db8fa424bb4a035262 [1421/1421] EDAC, skx_edac: Delete duplicated code config: x86_64-buildonly-randconfig-005-20250208 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091441.DGtT0ffE-lkp@…) compiler: clang version 19.1.3 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project ab51eccf88f5321e7c60591c5546b254b6afab99) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250209/202502091441.DGtT0ffE-lkp@…) 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(a)intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502091441.DGtT0ffE-lkp@intel.com/ All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> drivers/edac/skx_base.o: warning: objtool: skx_decode()+0x27b: can't find switch jump table -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

1 0