From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>,
Moritz Fischer <moritzf@google.com>,
Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
patches@lists.linux.dev,
Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
Subject: Re: Build error on -next: Unexpected GOT/PLT entries detected! (was Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry)
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 09:41:34 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240507124134.GN3341011@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aeea8546-5bce-4c51-b506-5d2008e52fef@leemhuis.info>
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 02:15:51PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 30.04.24 19:21, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Add tests for some of the more common STE update operations that we expect
> > to see, as well as some artificial STE updates to test the edges of
> > arm_smmu_write_entry. These also serve as a record of which common
> > operation is expected to be hitless, and how many syncs they require.
> >
> > arm_smmu_write_entry implements a generic algorithm that updates an STE/CD
> > to any other abritrary STE/CD configuration. The update requires a
> > sequence of write+sync operations with some invariants that must be held
> > true after each sync. arm_smmu_write_entry lends itself well to
> > unit-testing since the function's interaction with the STE/CD is already
> > abstracted by input callbacks that we can hook to introspect into the
> > sequence of operations. We can use these hooks to guarantee that
> > invariants are held throughout the entire update operation.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > +static void arm_smmu_v3_test_ste_expect_transition(
> > + struct kunit *test, const struct arm_smmu_ste *cur,
> > + const struct arm_smmu_ste *target, unsigned int num_syncs_expected,
> > + bool hitless)
> > +{
> > + struct arm_smmu_ste cur_copy = *cur;
> > [...]
>
> Lo! My daily -next builds of vanilla kernel RPM packages for all
> current Fedora releases started all to fail today on ARM64.
Fedora enables kunit in a production kernel????
> I currently lack time to investigate this properly, so feel free to
> ignore this, maybe this is a false alarm and cause by the build
> instructions in the RPM .spec file doing something stupid.
That's surprising to me.. this has been in 0-day for months now and
it's kconfig randomizer didn't hit this combination.
> /usr/bin/make -s 'HOSTCFLAGS=-O2 -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 \
> -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 \
> -mbranch-protection=standard -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection ' 'HOSTLDFLAGS=-Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed
> -Wl,-z,now -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld-errors -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 \
> -Wl,--build-id=sha1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes ' ARCH=arm64 'KCFLAGS= ' WITH_GCOV=0 -j4 vmlinuz.efi
> [...]
> ld: Unexpected GOT/PLT entries detected!
> ld: Unexpected run-time procedure linkages detected!
> ld: drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-test.o: in function `arm_smmu_v3_test_ste_expect_transition':
> /builddir/build/BUILD/kernel-next-20240507/linux-6.9.0-0.0.next.20240507.458.vanilla.fc41.aarch64/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-test.c:144:(.text+0x6f8): undefined reference to `kunit_mem_assert_format'
It is because your .config has kunit as modular but smmu is not. I
thought the kconfig prevented that in the usual way, but I see it
doesn't work :\
Let me come up with something
Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
Cc: iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
Moritz Fischer <mdf@kernel.org>,
Moritz Fischer <moritzf@google.com>,
Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
patches@lists.linux.dev,
Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
Subject: Re: Build error on -next: Unexpected GOT/PLT entries detected! (was Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry)
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 09:41:34 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240507124134.GN3341011@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aeea8546-5bce-4c51-b506-5d2008e52fef@leemhuis.info>
On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 02:15:51PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 30.04.24 19:21, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Add tests for some of the more common STE update operations that we expect
> > to see, as well as some artificial STE updates to test the edges of
> > arm_smmu_write_entry. These also serve as a record of which common
> > operation is expected to be hitless, and how many syncs they require.
> >
> > arm_smmu_write_entry implements a generic algorithm that updates an STE/CD
> > to any other abritrary STE/CD configuration. The update requires a
> > sequence of write+sync operations with some invariants that must be held
> > true after each sync. arm_smmu_write_entry lends itself well to
> > unit-testing since the function's interaction with the STE/CD is already
> > abstracted by input callbacks that we can hook to introspect into the
> > sequence of operations. We can use these hooks to guarantee that
> > invariants are held throughout the entire update operation.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > +static void arm_smmu_v3_test_ste_expect_transition(
> > + struct kunit *test, const struct arm_smmu_ste *cur,
> > + const struct arm_smmu_ste *target, unsigned int num_syncs_expected,
> > + bool hitless)
> > +{
> > + struct arm_smmu_ste cur_copy = *cur;
> > [...]
>
> Lo! My daily -next builds of vanilla kernel RPM packages for all
> current Fedora releases started all to fail today on ARM64.
Fedora enables kunit in a production kernel????
> I currently lack time to investigate this properly, so feel free to
> ignore this, maybe this is a false alarm and cause by the build
> instructions in the RPM .spec file doing something stupid.
That's surprising to me.. this has been in 0-day for months now and
it's kconfig randomizer didn't hit this combination.
> /usr/bin/make -s 'HOSTCFLAGS=-O2 -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 \
> -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 \
> -mbranch-protection=standard -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection ' 'HOSTLDFLAGS=-Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed
> -Wl,-z,now -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld-errors -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 \
> -Wl,--build-id=sha1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes ' ARCH=arm64 'KCFLAGS= ' WITH_GCOV=0 -j4 vmlinuz.efi
> [...]
> ld: Unexpected GOT/PLT entries detected!
> ld: Unexpected run-time procedure linkages detected!
> ld: drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-test.o: in function `arm_smmu_v3_test_ste_expect_transition':
> /builddir/build/BUILD/kernel-next-20240507/linux-6.9.0-0.0.next.20240507.458.vanilla.fc41.aarch64/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3-test.c:144:(.text+0x6f8): undefined reference to `kunit_mem_assert_format'
It is because your .config has kunit as modular but smmu is not. I
thought the kconfig prevented that in the usual way, but I see it
doesn't work :\
Let me come up with something
Jason
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-07 12:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-30 17:21 [PATCH v9 0/9] Make the SMMUv3 CD logic match the new STE design (part 2a/3) Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 1/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add an ops indirection to the STE code Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make CD programming use arm_smmu_write_entry() Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 3/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move the CD generation for S1 domains into a function Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 4/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Consolidate clearing a CD table entry Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 5/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Make arm_smmu_alloc_cd_ptr() Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 6/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Allocate the CD table entry in advance Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 7/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move the CD generation for SVA into a function Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 8/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Build the whole CD in arm_smmu_make_s1_cd() Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` [PATCH v9 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-30 17:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-07 12:15 ` Build error on -next: Unexpected GOT/PLT entries detected! (was Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry) Thorsten Leemhuis
2024-05-07 12:15 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2024-05-07 12:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2024-05-07 12:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-07 12:55 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2024-05-07 12:55 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2024-05-09 2:17 ` [PATCH v9 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add unit tests for arm_smmu_write_entry Jerry Snitselaar
2024-05-09 2:17 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2024-05-09 2:21 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2024-05-09 2:21 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2024-05-09 11:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-09 11:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-09 16:59 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2024-05-09 16:59 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2024-04-30 21:11 ` [PATCH v9 0/9] Make the SMMUv3 CD logic match the new STE design (part 2a/3) Nicolin Chen
2024-04-30 21:11 ` Nicolin Chen
2024-05-01 0:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-01 0:02 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-01 16:20 ` Will Deacon
2024-05-01 16:20 ` Will Deacon
2024-05-01 16:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-05-01 16:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240507124134.GN3341011@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@leemhuis.info \
--cc=mdf@kernel.org \
--cc=moritzf@google.com \
--cc=mshavit@google.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
--cc=smostafa@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.