From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, airlied@gmail.com,
"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
"Matthew Auld" <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm, drm_xe, Implement ttm_lru_walk_for_evict() using the guarded LRU iteration
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2025 02:39:38 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202506140238.KCnSVmrU-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250613151824.178650-4-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Hi Thomas,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on drm-xe/drm-xe-next]
[also build test WARNING on linus/master v6.16-rc1 next-20250613]
[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/Thomas-Hellstr-m/drm-ttm-Use-a-struct-for-the-common-part-of-struct-ttm_lru_walk-and-struct-ttm_bo_lru_cursor/20250613-232106
base: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel.git drm-xe-next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250613151824.178650-4-thomas.hellstrom%40linux.intel.com
patch subject: [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm, drm_xe, Implement ttm_lru_walk_for_evict() using the guarded LRU iteration
config: i386-buildonly-randconfig-005-20250613 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250614/202506140238.KCnSVmrU-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 20.1.2 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 58df0ef89dd64126512e4ee27b4ac3fd8ddf6247)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250614/202506140238.KCnSVmrU-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@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202506140238.KCnSVmrU-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c:965:7: warning: variable 'ret' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
965 | if (!bo_locked)
| ^~~~~~~~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c:975:8: note: uninitialized use occurs here
975 | if (!ret && bo->resource && bo->resource->mem_type == mem_type)
| ^~~
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c:965:3: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always true
965 | if (!bo_locked)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
966 | ret = ttm_lru_walk_ticketlock(arg, bo, &curs->needs_unlock);
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c:939:20: note: initialize the variable 'ret' to silence this warning
939 | int mem_type, ret;
| ^
| = 0
1 warning generated.
vim +965 drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_util.c
926
927 static struct ttm_buffer_object *
928 __ttm_bo_lru_cursor_next(struct ttm_bo_lru_cursor *curs, bool first)
929 {
930 spinlock_t *lru_lock = &curs->res_curs.man->bdev->lru_lock;
931 struct ttm_resource *res = NULL;
932 struct ttm_buffer_object *bo;
933 struct ttm_lru_walk_arg *arg = curs->arg;
934
935 ttm_bo_lru_cursor_cleanup_bo(curs);
936
937 spin_lock(lru_lock);
938 for (;;) {
939 int mem_type, ret;
940 bool bo_locked = false;
941
942 if (first) {
943 res = ttm_resource_manager_first(&curs->res_curs);
944 first = false;
945 } else {
946 res = ttm_resource_manager_next(&curs->res_curs);
947 }
948 if (!res)
949 break;
950
951 bo = res->bo;
952 if (ttm_lru_walk_trylock(arg, bo, &curs->needs_unlock))
953 bo_locked = true;
954 else if (!arg->ticket || arg->ctx->no_wait_gpu || arg->trylock_only)
955 continue;
956
957 if (!ttm_bo_get_unless_zero(bo)) {
958 if (curs->needs_unlock)
959 dma_resv_unlock(bo->base.resv);
960 continue;
961 }
962
963 mem_type = res->mem_type;
964 spin_unlock(lru_lock);
> 965 if (!bo_locked)
966 ret = ttm_lru_walk_ticketlock(arg, bo, &curs->needs_unlock);
967 /*
968 * Note that in between the release of the lru lock and the
969 * ticketlock, the bo may have switched resource,
970 * and also memory type, since the resource may have been
971 * freed and allocated again with a different memory type.
972 * In that case, just skip it.
973 */
974 curs->bo = bo;
975 if (!ret && bo->resource && bo->resource->mem_type == mem_type)
976 return bo;
977
978 ttm_bo_lru_cursor_cleanup_bo(curs);
979 if (ret)
980 return ERR_PTR(ret);
981
982 spin_lock(lru_lock);
983 }
984
985 spin_unlock(lru_lock);
986 return res ? bo : NULL;
987 }
988
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-13 18:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-13 15:18 [PATCH 0/3] drm/ttm, drm/xe: Consolidate the Buffer Object LRU walks Thomas Hellström
2025-06-13 15:18 ` [PATCH 1/3] drm/ttm: Use a struct for the common part of struct ttm_lru_walk and struct ttm_bo_lru_cursor Thomas Hellström
2025-06-16 13:04 ` Christian König
2025-06-13 15:18 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/ttm, drm/xe: Modify the struct ttm_bo_lru_walk_cursor initialization Thomas Hellström
2025-06-16 13:15 ` Christian König
2025-06-13 15:18 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm, drm_xe, Implement ttm_lru_walk_for_evict() using the guarded LRU iteration Thomas Hellström
2025-06-13 18:39 ` kernel test robot [this message]
2025-06-16 13:23 ` Christian König
2025-06-16 15:29 ` Thomas Hellström
2025-06-18 17:43 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-13 17:15 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for drm/ttm, drm/xe: Consolidate the Buffer Object LRU walks Patchwork
2025-06-13 17:16 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-06-13 18:19 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-06-15 14:51 ` ✓ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-06-14 10:11 [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm, drm_xe, Implement ttm_lru_walk_for_evict() using the guarded LRU iteration kernel test robot
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=202506140238.KCnSVmrU-lkp@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
/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.