From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lgeamrelo03.lge.com (lgeamrelo03.lge.com [156.147.51.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B7CE2EB5D5 for ; Tue, 22 Jul 2025 14:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=156.147.51.102 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753193660; cv=none; b=V+DfDAjYVb/LFLnKHSyXovJnC+OeT1S5DfmJhz8ZnIxe4nSy2xYxpSO8EGSFyjNLbp9GLW3ZoD23zwSMO6klvTuwmIYGxCvw7VrK2A6kDcX3zurq+s/MsNUfgLae+hbcV8BRQQzPgSYozah/A/4JcRqJOKm9QfPIGVWLsvCE/rM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753193660; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YbZj6IAnk6i1IGZYhFj9C06BbWO/yAXaTN7raclAZtM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Lx1ovFLl5G7NVNiiVCA0Gp9s8r3txSfcMRyFNZ+i7TFDraIuK8XGc4i/EVqYmm4BMRScxic8LVmO7XE99k34MzxJbSCls7he9KXVuiezKkIKmfdQViJ6TU+F4ytgpx4l7uf1ToOY4ML5RpoDfAVUp787mZdKiSLa1UkKi394xuQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lge.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lge.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=156.147.51.102 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lge.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lge.com Received: from unknown (HELO yjaykim-PowerEdge-T330) (10.177.112.156) by 156.147.51.102 with ESMTP; 22 Jul 2025 23:14:16 +0900 X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.112.156 X-Original-MAILFROM: youngjun.park@lge.com Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 23:14:09 +0900 From: YoungJun Park To: kernel test robot Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, mhocko@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, muchun.song@linux.dev, shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, kasong@tencent.com, nphamcs@gmail.com, bhe@redhat.com, baohua@kernel.org, chrisl@kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gunho.lee@lge.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, taejoon.song@lge.com, Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/swap, memcg: Introduce infrastructure for cgroup-based swap priority Message-ID: References: <20250716202006.3640584-2-youngjun.park@lge.com> <202507212243.Lf8fSo0T-lkp@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <202507212243.Lf8fSo0T-lkp@intel.com> On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:13:24PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi Youngjun, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > [auto build test WARNING on 347e9f5043c89695b01e66b3ed111755afcf1911] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Youngjun-Park/mm-swap-memcg-Introduce-infrastructure-for-cgroup-based-swap-priority/20250717-042648 > base: 347e9f5043c89695b01e66b3ed111755afcf1911 > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250716202006.3640584-2-youngjun.park%40lge.com > patch subject: [PATCH 1/4] mm/swap, memcg: Introduce infrastructure for cgroup-based swap priority > config: loongarch-randconfig-r123-20250721 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250721/202507212243.Lf8fSo0T-lkp@intel.com/config) > compiler: clang version 19.1.7 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project cd708029e0b2869e80abe31ddb175f7c35361f90) > reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250721/202507212243.Lf8fSo0T-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 > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202507212243.Lf8fSo0T-lkp@intel.com/ > > sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) > >> mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:115:16: sparse: sparse: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces): > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:115:16: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority [noderef] __rcu * > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:115:16: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority * > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:729:9: sparse: sparse: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces): > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:729:9: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority [noderef] __rcu * > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:729:9: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority * > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:638:25: sparse: sparse: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces): > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:638:25: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority [noderef] __rcu * > mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c:638:25: sparse: struct swap_cgroup_priority * > > vim +115 mm/swap_cgroup_priority.c > > 108 > 109 static struct swap_cgroup_priority *get_swap_cgroup_priority( > 110 struct mem_cgroup *memcg) > 111 { > 112 if (!memcg) > 113 return NULL; > 114 > > 115 return rcu_dereference(memcg->swap_priority); > 116 } > 117 > This part of the code, which retrieves the object, is expected to be properly updated in a subsequent patch series. Therefore, I believe it's reasonable to leave it as-is for now. Best Regard, Youngjun Park