From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB91718B1B for ; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 23:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Bti9YNf1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1698537168; x=1730073168; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=R3ePuL4vq+sAzBWIYdj4gVbm4UTl4lP7m7iJEL0Vt+U=; b=Bti9YNf1bTjY3/xQ9JUSQEfhc6KbmF7kdSGgLESUygZVNA7u6fi9k4+G It8EcCqyF4vpHrBjVvXxHgpY3AUTD/Cy0Z8+3+0v9ejD//MKHmDoH7jsn Rsj6nSp/YmE5zLX4JjITBAqHeqM6UEoNBGb97wpdpA0cAcHEn1zV3V5OT xxWDOLh3no61UQRX+5hhoxZ3/v81d1NEHjyC9jjHXYOfsNLqcHDN0WCKK BDiNbPA/Ot++2kUtg6a27XNOR6dgSlHzGj/62gSD3rEASgxFMYSxpl0mo MMUwTbGAhjeEaA8zvryLKFdwyFVMzMDADvC3/ABiy10OWuGRPxGeh16C4 A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10877"; a="454390467" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,260,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="454390467" Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Oct 2023 16:52:45 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10877"; a="1007077007" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,260,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="1007077007" Received: from lkp-server01.sh.intel.com (HELO 8917679a5d3e) ([10.239.97.150]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2023 16:52:43 -0700 Received: from kbuild by 8917679a5d3e with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1qwt6f-000CBX-2R; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 23:52:41 +0000 Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2023 07:51:52 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Daniel Gomez Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/11] shmem: add large folio support to the write path Message-ID: <202310290726.C5ndh95F-lkp@intel.com> References: <20231028211518.3424020-11-da.gomez@samsung.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231028211518.3424020-11-da.gomez@samsung.com> Hi Daniel, [This is a private test report for your RFC patch.] kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: [auto build test WARNING on akpm-mm/mm-everything] [also build test WARNING on next-20231027] [cannot apply to linus/master v6.6-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/Daniel-Gomez/XArray-add-cmpxchg-order-test/20231029-051730 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231028211518.3424020-11-da.gomez%40samsung.com patch subject: [RFC PATCH 10/11] shmem: add large folio support to the write path config: loongarch-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231029/202310290726.C5ndh95F-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: loongarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231029/202310290726.C5ndh95F-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 | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202310290726.C5ndh95F-lkp@intel.com/ All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> mm/shmem.c:1652: warning: Function parameter or member 'sbinfo' not described in 'shmem_mapping_size_order' vim +1652 mm/shmem.c 1633 1634 /** 1635 * shmem_mapping_size_order - Get maximum folio order for the given file size. 1636 * @mapping: Target address_space. 1637 * @index: The page index. 1638 * @size: The suggested size of the folio to create. 1639 * 1640 * This returns a high order for folios (when supported) based on the file size 1641 * which the mapping currently allows at the given index. The index is relevant 1642 * due to alignment considerations the mapping might have. The returned order 1643 * may be less than the size passed. 1644 * 1645 * Like __filemap_get_folio order calculation. 1646 * 1647 * Return: The order. 1648 */ 1649 static inline unsigned int 1650 shmem_mapping_size_order(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, 1651 size_t size, struct shmem_sb_info *sbinfo) > 1652 { 1653 unsigned int order = ilog2(size); 1654 1655 if ((order <= PAGE_SHIFT) || 1656 (!mapping_large_folio_support(mapping) || !sbinfo->noswap)) 1657 return 0; 1658 1659 order -= PAGE_SHIFT; 1660 1661 /* If we're not aligned, allocate a smaller folio */ 1662 if (index & ((1UL << order) - 1)) 1663 order = __ffs(index); 1664 1665 order = min_t(size_t, order, MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER); 1666 1667 /* Order-1 not supported due to THP dependency */ 1668 return (order == 1) ? 0 : order; 1669 } 1670 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki