All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev
Subject: [kkdwivedi:rqspinlock-owner 25/25] kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:98:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 17:54:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <202610161715.UkQUIkfo-lkp@intel.com> (raw)

tree:   https://github.com/kkdwivedi/linux rqspinlock-owner
head:   b7b5b7c8a79dfa5564b7f98ad4691e53e1de0123
commit: ae7807cc237a7422d939f3692b9a3095a10ef881 [25/25] rqspinlock: Cache the owner value in the held-locks table
config: i386-randconfig-2300-20261016 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20261016/202610161715.UkQUIkfo-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/20261016/202610161715.UkQUIkfo-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/202610161715.UkQUIkfo-lkp@intel.com/

sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>> kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:98:17: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@     got unsigned int * @@
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:98:17: sparse:     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:98:17: sparse:     got unsigned int *
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:112:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@     got struct rqspinlock_held * @@
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:112:39: sparse:     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:112:39: sparse:     got struct rqspinlock_held *
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:133:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@     got struct rqspinlock_held * @@
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:133:39: sparse:     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:133:39: sparse:     got struct rqspinlock_held *
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:146:51: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@     got struct rqspinlock_held * @@
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:146:51: sparse:     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:146:51: sparse:     got struct rqspinlock_held *
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:681:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify @@     got struct rqspinlock_held * @@
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:681:39: sparse:     expected void const [noderef] __percpu *__vpp_verify
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:681:39: sparse:     got struct rqspinlock_held *
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:705:17: sparse: sparse: symbol 'bpf_res_spin_lock' was not declared. Should it be static?
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:721:18: sparse: sparse: symbol 'bpf_res_spin_unlock' was not declared. Should it be static?
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:727:17: sparse: sparse: symbol 'bpf_res_spin_lock_irqsave' was not declared. Should it be static?
   kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c:746:18: sparse: sparse: symbol 'bpf_res_spin_unlock_irqrestore' was not declared. Should it be static?

vim +98 kernel/bpf/rqspinlock.c

    85	
    86	/*
    87	 * Fill in each CPU's owner value for the lock word. Per-CPU memory for every
    88	 * possible CPU exists from setup_per_cpu_areas() on, and an early initcall
    89	 * runs before secondary CPUs are brought up and long before user space, which
    90	 * is what every rqspinlock user needs to issue an acquisition. A copy left at
    91	 * zero would still form a valid lock word (see struct rqspinlock_held).
    92	 */
    93	static int __init rqspinlock_init_owner(void)
    94	{
    95		int cpu;
    96	
    97		for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
  > 98			per_cpu(rqspinlock_held_locks.owner, cpu) = cpu << RQ_OWNER_OFFSET;
    99		return 0;
   100	}
   101	early_initcall(rqspinlock_init_owner);
   102	

--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

                 reply	other threads:[~2026-10-16 15:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=202610161715.UkQUIkfo-lkp@intel.com \
    --to=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
    /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.