From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Martin Weiss <martin.githubacc@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
Martin Weiss <Martin.weiss2410@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace_branch: use per-cpu counters for correct/incorrect stats
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 03:38:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202608070304.QNhu3z0S-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260629095838.601926-1-Martin.weiss2410@gmail.com>
Hi Martin,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on trace/for-next]
[also build test WARNING on linus/master v7.2-rc6 next-20260806]
[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/Martin-Weiss/trace_branch-use-per-cpu-counters-for-correct-incorrect-stats/20260806-093445
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace for-next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260629095838.601926-1-Martin.weiss2410%40gmail.com
patch subject: [PATCH] trace_branch: use per-cpu counters for correct/incorrect stats
config: um-randconfig-r123-20260806 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260807/202608070304.QNhu3z0S-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: gcc-14 (Debian 14.2.0-19) 14.2.0
sparse: v0.6.5-rc1
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260807/202608070304.QNhu3z0S-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/202608070304.QNhu3z0S-lkp@intel.com/
sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:218:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@ got unsigned long * @@
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:220:17: sparse: got unsigned long *
vim +218 kernel/trace/trace_branch.c
197
198 void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
199 int expect, int is_constant)
200 {
201 unsigned long flags = user_access_save();
202
203 /* A constant is always correct */
204 if (is_constant) {
205 f->constant++;
206 val = expect;
207 }
208 /*
209 * I would love to have a trace point here instead, but the
210 * trace point code is so inundated with unlikely and likely
211 * conditions that the recursive nightmare that exists is too
212 * much to try to get working. At least for now.
213 */
214 trace_likely_condition(f, val, expect);
215
216 /* use per-cpu counters to avoid contention */
217 if (val == expect)
> 218 this_cpu_inc(f->data.correct);
219 else
220 this_cpu_inc(f->data.incorrect);
221
222 user_access_restore(flags);
223 }
224 EXPORT_SYMBOL(ftrace_likely_update);
225
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-06 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-29 9:58 [PATCH] trace_branch: use per-cpu counters for correct/incorrect stats Martin Weiss
2026-06-29 10:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-06 16:53 ` kernel test robot
2026-08-06 19:38 ` kernel test robot [this message]
2026-08-06 20:04 ` 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=202608070304.QNhu3z0S-lkp@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=Martin.weiss2410@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.githubacc@gmail.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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.