* Re: arm64/for-kernelci build: 2 builds: 1 failed, 1 passed, 2 errors, 1 warning (arm64-fixes)
2021-07-20 12:53 ` Will Deacon
@ 2021-07-20 14:00 ` Guillaume Tucker
2021-07-20 14:13 ` Robin Murphy
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Guillaume Tucker @ 2021-07-20 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Will Deacon, kernelci.org bot
Cc: catalin.marinas, kernelci-results, linux-arm-kernel,
kernel-build-reports
On 20/07/2021 13:53, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 08:05:20AM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote:
>> arm64/for-kernelci build: 2 builds: 1 failed, 1 passed, 2 errors, 1 warning (arm64-fixes)
>>
>> Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/arm64/branch/for-kernelci/kernel/arm64-fixes/
>>
>> Tree: arm64
>> Branch: for-kernelci
>> Git Describe: arm64-fixes
>> Git Commit: e6f85cbeb23bd74b8966cf1f15bf7d01399ff625
>> Git URL: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git
>> Built: 1 unique architecture
>>
>> Build Failure Detected:
>>
>> arm64:
>> allmodconfig: (gcc-8) FAIL
>>
>> Errors and Warnings Detected:
>>
>> arm64:
>> allmodconfig (gcc-8): 2 errors, 1 warning
>>
>> Errors summary:
>>
>> 1 ./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1864’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>> 1 ./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1857’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>
> Hmm, is there a way to find out more information about which assertion is
> causing the problem here? I'm not able to reproduce this locally, the branch
> in question has now been merged upstream and I can't see anything in there
> which would trigger this.
It's true that each section about a particular build could have a
link to the page on the dashboard with all the details, that's
something to improve.
The way to find things out right now is to start with the main
link from the top of the email report, which shows all the builds
for this kernel revision:
https://kernelci.org/build/arm64/branch/for-kernelci/kernel/arm64-fixes/
Then you can see the ones with errors, including the allmodconfig one:
https://linux.kernelci.org/build/id/60f59321f76d8d0f141160be/
There's also a direct link to the logs, and then it takes a bit
of manual hunting. The error mentioned here can be found in the
modules build log:
https://storage.kernelci.org/arm64/for-kernelci/arm64-fixes/arm64/allmodconfig/gcc-8/logs/modules.log
In file included from ../include/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:5,
from ../arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/byteorder.h:23,
from ../include/asm-generic/bitops/le.h:7,
from ../arch/arm64/include/asm/bitops.h:29,
from ../include/linux/bitops.h:32,
from ../include/linux/of.h:15,
from ../include/linux/irqdomain.h:35,
from ../include/linux/acpi.h:13,
from ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:33:
In function ‘modify_qp_init_to_rtr’,
inlined from ‘hns_roce_v2_set_abs_fields’ at ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:4798:9,
inlined from ‘hns_roce_v2_modify_qp’ at ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:5001:8:
./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1857’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
_compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
^
I guess you could take a look at allmodconfig build logs from
linux-next now it's merged, to see if it's also there.
Hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Guillaume
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: arm64/for-kernelci build: 2 builds: 1 failed, 1 passed, 2 errors, 1 warning (arm64-fixes)
2021-07-20 12:53 ` Will Deacon
2021-07-20 14:00 ` Guillaume Tucker
@ 2021-07-20 14:13 ` Robin Murphy
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Robin Murphy @ 2021-07-20 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Will Deacon, kernelci.org bot
Cc: catalin.marinas, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-build-reports,
kernelci-results
On 2021-07-20 13:53, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 08:05:20AM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote:
>> arm64/for-kernelci build: 2 builds: 1 failed, 1 passed, 2 errors, 1 warning (arm64-fixes)
>>
>> Full Build Summary: https://kernelci.org/build/arm64/branch/for-kernelci/kernel/arm64-fixes/
>>
>> Tree: arm64
>> Branch: for-kernelci
>> Git Describe: arm64-fixes
>> Git Commit: e6f85cbeb23bd74b8966cf1f15bf7d01399ff625
>> Git URL: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git
>> Built: 1 unique architecture
>>
>> Build Failure Detected:
>>
>> arm64:
>> allmodconfig: (gcc-8) FAIL
>>
>> Errors and Warnings Detected:
>>
>> arm64:
>> allmodconfig (gcc-8): 2 errors, 1 warning
>>
>> Errors summary:
>>
>> 1 ./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1864’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>> 1 ./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1857’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>
> Hmm, is there a way to find out more information about which assertion is
> causing the problem here? I'm not able to reproduce this locally, the branch
> in question has now been merged upstream and I can't see anything in there
> which would trigger this.
If you dig down into the raw logs it eventually appears to be the HNS
inifiniband driver:
In file included from ../include/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:5,
from ../arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/byteorder.h:23,
from ../include/asm-generic/bitops/le.h:7,
from ../arch/arm64/include/asm/bitops.h:29,
from ../include/linux/bitops.h:32,
from ../include/linux/of.h:15,
from ../include/linux/irqdomain.h:35,
from ../include/linux/acpi.h:13,
from ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:33:
In function ‘modify_qp_init_to_rtr’,
inlined from ‘hns_roce_v2_set_abs_fields’ at ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:4798:9,
inlined from ‘hns_roce_v2_modify_qp’ at ../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:5001:8:
./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:38: error: call to ‘__compiletime_assert_1857’ declared with attribute error: FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
_compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
^
../include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:33:51: note: in definition of macro ‘__cpu_to_le32’
#define __cpu_to_le32(x) ((__force __le32)(__u32)(x))
^
./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:316:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__compiletime_assert’
__compiletime_assert(condition, msg, prefix, suffix)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./../include/linux/compiler_types.h:328:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘_compiletime_assert’
_compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../include/linux/build_bug.h:39:37: note: in expansion of macro ‘compiletime_assert’
#define BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(cond, msg) compiletime_assert(!(cond), msg)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../include/linux/bitfield.h:49:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG’
BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(__builtin_constant_p(_val) ? \
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../include/linux/bitfield.h:94:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__BF_FIELD_CHECK’
__BF_FIELD_CHECK(_mask, 0ULL, _val, "FIELD_PREP: "); \
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h:91:52: note: in expansion of macro ‘FIELD_PREP’
*((__le32 *)ptr + (field_h) / 32) |= cpu_to_le32(FIELD_PREP( \
^~~~~~~~~~
../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_common.h:95:39: note: in expansion of macro ‘_hr_reg_write’
#define hr_reg_write(ptr, field, val) _hr_reg_write(ptr, field, val)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~
../drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c:4422:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘hr_reg_write’
hr_reg_write(context, QPC_LP_PKTN_INI, lp_pktn_ini);
^~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't see that it has much to do with the arm64 tree though :/
Robin.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread