From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@kernel.org
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 11:27:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202310201121.PIqR9OmB-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231019235305.656855-8-andrii@kernel.org>
Hi Andrii,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Andrii-Nakryiko/bpf-improve-JEQ-JNE-branch-taken-logic/20231020-075514
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231019235305.656855-8-andrii%40kernel.org
patch subject: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester
reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231020/202310201121.PIqR9OmB-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/202310201121.PIqR9OmB-lkp@intel.com/
# many are suggestions rather than must-fix
WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#168: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:21:
+typedef unsigned long long ___u64;
WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#169: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:22:
+typedef unsigned int ___u32;
WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#170: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:23:
+typedef long long ___s64;
WARNING:NEW_TYPEDEFS: do not add new typedefs
#171: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:24:
+typedef int ___s32;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#214: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:67:
+ case U64: return (u64)x < (u64)y ? (u64)x : (u64)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#215: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:68:
+ case U32: return (u32)x < (u32)y ? (u32)x : (u32)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#216: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:69:
+ case S64: return (s64)x < (s64)y ? (s64)x : (s64)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#217: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:70:
+ case S32: return (s32)x < (s32)y ? (s32)x : (s32)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#218: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:71:
+ default: printf("min_t!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'min_t', this function's name, in a string
#218: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:71:
+ default: printf("min_t!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#225: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:78:
+ case U64: return (u64)x > (u64)y ? (u64)x : (u64)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#226: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:79:
+ case U32: return (u32)x > (u32)y ? (u32)x : (u32)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#227: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:80:
+ case S64: return (s64)x > (s64)y ? (s64)x : (s64)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#228: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:81:
+ case S32: return (s32)x > (s32)y ? (u32)(s32)x : (u32)(s32)y;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#229: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:82:
+ default: printf("max_t!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'max_t', this function's name, in a string
#229: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:82:
+ default: printf("max_t!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#240: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:93:
+ default: printf("t_str!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_str', this function's name, in a string
#240: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:93:
+ default: printf("t_str!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#251: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:104:
+ default: printf("t_is_32!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_is_32', this function's name, in a string
#251: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:104:
+ default: printf("t_is_32!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#262: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:115:
+ default: printf("t_signed!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_signed', this function's name, in a string
#262: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:115:
+ default: printf("t_signed!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#273: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:126:
+ default: printf("t_unsigned!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 't_unsigned', this function's name, in a string
#273: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:126:
+ default: printf("t_unsigned!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#284: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:137:
+ default: printf("num_is_small!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'num_is_small', this function's name, in a string
#284: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:137:
+ default: printf("num_is_small!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#298: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:151:
+ default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'snprintf_num', this function's name, in a string
#298: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:151:
+ default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#338: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:191:
+ default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'snprintf_num', this function's name, in a string
#338: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:191:
+ default: printf("snprintf_num!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#385: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:238:
+ default: printf("unkn_subreg!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'unkn_subreg', this function's name, in a string
#385: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:238:
+ default: printf("unkn_subreg!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#396: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:249:
+ default: printf("range!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range', this function's name, in a string
#396: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:249:
+ default: printf("range!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#453: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:306:
+ default: printf("range_cast_u64!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_u64', this function's name, in a string
#453: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:306:
+ default: printf("range_cast_u64!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#475: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:328:
+ default: printf("range_cast_s64!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_s64', this function's name, in a string
#475: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:328:
+ default: printf("range_cast_s64!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#492: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:345:
+ default: printf("range_cast_u32!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_u32', this function's name, in a string
#492: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:345:
+ default: printf("range_cast_u32!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#509: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:362:
+ default: printf("range_cast_s32!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast_s32', this function's name, in a string
#509: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:362:
+ default: printf("range_cast_s32!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#525: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:378:
+ default: printf("range_cast!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'range_cast', this function's name, in a string
#525: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:378:
+ default: printf("range_cast!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#536: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:389:
+ default: printf("is_valid_num!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'is_valid_num', this function's name, in a string
#536: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:389:
+ default: printf("is_valid_num!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#550: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:403:
+ default: printf("is_valid_range!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'is_valid_range', this function's name, in a string
#550: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:403:
+ default: printf("is_valid_range!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#605: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:458:
+ default: printf("complement_op!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'complement_op', this function's name, in a string
#605: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:458:
+ default: printf("complement_op!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#618: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:471:
+ default: printf("op_str!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:EMBEDDED_FUNCTION_NAME: Prefer using '"%s...", __func__' to using 'op_str', this function's name, in a string
#618: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:471:
+ default: printf("op_str!\n"); exit(1);
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#637: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:490:
+ default: printf("range_canbe op %d\n", op); exit(1); \
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#642: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:495:
+ case U64: { range_canbe(u64); }
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#643: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:496:
+ case U32: { range_canbe(u32); }
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#644: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:497:
+ case S64: { range_canbe(s64); }
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#645: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:498:
+ case S32: { range_canbe(s32); }
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#646: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:499:
+ default: printf("range_canbe!\n"); exit(1);
WARNING:LINE_SPACING: Missing a blank line after declarations
#932: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:785:
+ struct bpf_insn insns[64];
+ LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_prog_load_opts, opts,
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1013: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:866:
+ case OP_LT: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSLT : BPF_JLT; break;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1014: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:867:
+ case OP_LE: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSLE : BPF_JLE; break;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1015: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:868:
+ case OP_GT: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSGT : BPF_JGT; break;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1016: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:869:
+ case OP_GE: op_code = spec.compare_signed ? BPF_JSGE : BPF_JGE; break;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1017: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:870:
+ case OP_EQ: op_code = BPF_JEQ; break;
ERROR:TRAILING_STATEMENTS: trailing statements should be on next line
#1018: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:871:
+ case OP_NE: op_code = BPF_JNE; break;
WARNING:BRACES: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
#1152: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1005:
+ for (t = MIN_T; t <= MAX_T; t++) {
+ reg->r[t] = range(t, sval, sval);
+ }
WARNING:BRACES: braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
#1558: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1411:
+ for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(lower_seeds); j++) {
+ uvals[cnt++] = (((u64)upper_seeds[i]) << 32) | lower_seeds[j];
+ }
WARNING:SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 8)
#1663: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1516:
+ for (i = 0; i < val_cnt; i++)
+ for (j = 0; j < range_cnt; j++)
WARNING:SUSPECT_CODE_INDENT: suspect code indent for conditional statements (8, 8)
#1664: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reg_bounds.c:1517:
+ for (j = 0; j < range_cnt; j++)
+ for (cond_t = MIN_T; cond_t <= MAX_T; cond_t++) {
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-20 3:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-19 23:52 [PATCH v3 bpf-next 0/7] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:52 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 1/7] bpf: improve JEQ/JNE branch taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 2/7] bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: enhance subregister bounds deduction logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: improve deduction of 64-bit bounds from 32-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 5/7] bpf: try harder to deduce register bounds from different numeric domains Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: drop knowledge-losing __reg_combine_{32,64}_into_{64,32} logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-19 23:53 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-20 3:27 ` kernel test robot [this message]
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=202310201121.PIqR9OmB-lkp@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox