All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, lkp@intel.com
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:55:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z-qCrbNvP2cil6jJ@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250329153242.GAZ-gSmu8qiXufR04k@fat_crate.local>


* Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:18:57PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Linus,
> > 
> > Please pull the latest objtool/urgent Git tree from:
> > 
> >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git objtool-urgent-2025-03-28
> > 
> >    # HEAD: ae958b12940bcd4ffa32c44684e4f2878bc5e140 objtool, drm/vmwgfx: Don't ignore vmw_send_msg() for ORC
> > 
> > [ Merge note: not all driver fixes below have maintainer acks. ]
> 
> Btw, test bot complains:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/202503292202.Sge7ZEUc-lkp@intel.com

AFAICS that particular report is not a new regression, but essentially 
a test-bot false positive due to a reporting change, because the 
objtool warning output changed.

This can be seen in the full report:

  https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202503280703.OARM8SrY-lkp@intel.com/

  All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):

     arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[22]=-1+0 reg2[22]=-2-160
     arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[23]=-1+0 reg2[23]=-2-152
  >> arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: skipping duplicate warning(s)

Note how '>>' is the new warning - the summary line added recently that 
suggests that there's more warnings. It appears to me the test-bot 
considers the other warnings old regressions, but I couldn't find any 
trace of them being reported before. Maybe they weren't Cc:-ed to lkml.

Or maybe these *are* all new warnings. I've Cc:-ed the LKP folks.

To add confusion to confusion, the test bot also incorrectly attributed 
ae958b1294 for that new warning line, and incorrectly categorized it as 
a 'recent_error':

  recent_errors
  `-- loongarch-randconfig-001-20250328
      `-- arch-loongarch-kernel-traps.o:warning:objtool:show_stack:skipping-duplicate-warning(s)

While the commit that added this new reporting line is:

  0a7fb6f07e3a ("objtool: Increase per-function WARN_FUNC() rate limit")

... which is a few weeks old and already upstream. We didn't get a 
loongson related test-bot regression report for that commit or any 
other commits, other than the weeks-late & self-contradictory report 
against ae958b1294.

So something's wonky with the test-bot reporting in this particular 
case for loongson, or my parsing thereof.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-03-31 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-28 21:18 [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates Ingo Molnar
2025-03-29 15:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-30 22:19   ` Linus Torvalds
2025-03-30 23:13     ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31  1:39       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31  9:39         ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 15:29           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31 16:07             ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:19         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  7:58           ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 11:55   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2025-03-31 12:31     ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:36       ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 12:44         ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:49           ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 13:27             ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 16:10       ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:17         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  0:38           ` Philip Li
2025-04-01  2:05             ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-01  4:15               ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01  6:12                 ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-02 17:48 ` pr-tracker-bot

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=Z-qCrbNvP2cil6jJ@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.