Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

+cc s390 people, kvm s390 people + lists. sorry for noise but get_maintainers.pl
says there's a lot of you :)

On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, Ignacio Moreno Gonzalez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Due to the line:
>
> include/linux/huge_mm.h:509 '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>'

BTW, I didn't notice at the time, but shouldn't this be linux/mman.h? You
shouldn't be importing this header this way generally (only other users are arch
code).

But at any rate, you will ultimately import the PROT_NONE declaration.

>
> there is a name collision in arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c, where 'PROT_NONE' is also defined as value for 'enum prot_type'.

That is crazy. Been there since 2022 also...!

>
> A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.

Yeah this is the correct fix, IMO, but you will need to get that sorted with the
arch maintainers.

I think this suggests we should back out this change for now and try again next
cycle given we haven't much time left.

Have cc'd s390/kvm for s390 maintainers for their input however!

>
> The patch causing this problem was created by me based on a suggestion in the review process of another patch that I submitted first:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/ee95ddf9-0d00-4523-ad2a-c2410fd0e1a3@lucifer.local/
>
> In case '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>' causes unexpected trouble, we can also take the patch back... What do you think?

I guess we need to back this out for the time being, since we're so near the end of the cycle.

>
> Thanks and regards
> Ignacio
>
> On 5/14/2025 3:05 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
> >>> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:344:8: error: duplicate case value: '0' and 'PROT_TYPE_LA' both equal '0'
>
>

For convenience, let me include the top of the original report. The full thing
is at https://lore.kernel.org/all/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/

The original patch for this is at
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250508-madvise-nohugepage-noop-without-thp-v1-1-e7ceffb197f3@kuka.com/

Original report:


tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-new
head:   24e96425873f27730d30dcfc639a3995e312e6f2
commit: cd07d277e6acce78e103478ea19a452bcf31013e [320/331] mm: madvise: make MADV_NOHUGEPAGE a no-op if !THP
config: s390-randconfig-r062-20250514
+(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250514/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
+(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250514/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-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/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

>> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier
     321 |         PROT_NONE,
         |         ^
   include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h:16:19: note: expanded from macro 'PROT_NONE'
      16 | #define PROT_NONE       0x0             /* page can not be accessed */
         |                         ^
>> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:344:8: error: duplicate case value: '0' and 'PROT_TYPE_LA' both equal '0'
     344 |                 case PROT_TYPE_LA:
         |                      ^
   arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:337:8: note: previous case defined here
     337 |                 case PROT_NONE:
         |                      ^
   include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h:16:19: note: expanded from macro 'PROT_NONE'
      16 | #define PROT_NONE       0x0             /* page can not be accessed */
         |                         ^

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Claudio Imbrenda]

On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:48:44 +0100
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:

> +cc s390 people, kvm s390 people + lists. sorry for noise but get_maintainers.pl
> says there's a lot of you :)
> 
> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, Ignacio Moreno Gonzalez wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Due to the line:
> >
> > include/linux/huge_mm.h:509 '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>'  
> 
> BTW, I didn't notice at the time, but shouldn't this be linux/mman.h? You
> shouldn't be importing this header this way generally (only other users are arch
> code).
> 
> But at any rate, you will ultimately import the PROT_NONE declaration.
> 
> >
> > there is a name collision in arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c, where 'PROT_NONE' is also defined as value for 'enum prot_type'.  
> 
> That is crazy. Been there since 2022 also...!
> 
> >
> > A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.  

please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.

if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
the mm tree

> 
> Yeah this is the correct fix, IMO, but you will need to get that sorted with the
> arch maintainers.
> 
> I think this suggests we should back out this change for now and try again next
> cycle given we haven't much time left.
> 
> Have cc'd s390/kvm for s390 maintainers for their input however!
> 
> >
> > The patch causing this problem was created by me based on a suggestion in the review process of another patch that I submitted first:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/ee95ddf9-0d00-4523-ad2a-c2410fd0e1a3@lucifer.local/
> >
> > In case '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>' causes unexpected trouble, we can also take the patch back... What do you think?  
> 
> I guess we need to back this out for the time being, since we're so near the end of the cycle.
> 
> >
> > Thanks and regards
> > Ignacio
> >
> > On 5/14/2025 3:05 AM, kernel test robot wrote:  
> > >>> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:344:8: error: duplicate case value: '0' and 'PROT_TYPE_LA' both equal '0'  
> >
> >  
> 
> For convenience, let me include the top of the original report. The full thing
> is at https://lore.kernel.org/all/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/
> 
> The original patch for this is at
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250508-madvise-nohugepage-noop-without-thp-v1-1-e7ceffb197f3@kuka.com/
> 
> Original report:
> 
> 
> tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-new
> head:   24e96425873f27730d30dcfc639a3995e312e6f2
> commit: cd07d277e6acce78e103478ea19a452bcf31013e [320/331] mm: madvise: make MADV_NOHUGEPAGE a no-op if !THP
> config: s390-randconfig-r062-20250514
> +(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250514/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: clang version 21.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project f819f46284f2a79790038e1f6649172789734ae8)
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
> +(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250514/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-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/202505140943.IgHDa9s7-lkp@intel.com/
> 
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> 
> >> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier  
>      321 |         PROT_NONE,
>          |         ^
>    include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h:16:19: note: expanded from macro 'PROT_NONE'
>       16 | #define PROT_NONE       0x0             /* page can not be accessed */
>          |                         ^
> >> arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:344:8: error: duplicate case value: '0' and 'PROT_TYPE_LA' both equal '0'  
>      344 |                 case PROT_TYPE_LA:
>          |                      ^
>    arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:337:8: note: previous case defined here
>      337 |                 case PROT_NONE:
>          |                      ^
>    include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h:16:19: note: expanded from macro 'PROT_NONE'
>       16 | #define PROT_NONE       0x0             /* page can not be accessed */
>          |                         ^

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Christian Borntraeger]

Am 14.05.25 um 16:27 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
> On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:48:44 +0100
> Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> +cc s390 people, kvm s390 people + lists. sorry for noise but get_maintainers.pl
>> says there's a lot of you :)
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, Ignacio Moreno Gonzalez wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Due to the line:
>>>
>>> include/linux/huge_mm.h:509 '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>'
>>
>> BTW, I didn't notice at the time, but shouldn't this be linux/mman.h? You
>> shouldn't be importing this header this way generally (only other users are arch
>> code).
>>
>> But at any rate, you will ultimately import the PROT_NONE declaration.
>>
>>>
>>> there is a name collision in arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c, where 'PROT_NONE' is also defined as value for 'enum prot_type'.
>>
>> That is crazy. Been there since 2022 also...!
>>
>>>
>>> A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.
> 
> please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
> PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
> 
> if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
> the mm tree

Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>

for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
patch.

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Claudio Imbrenda]

On Wed, 14 May 2025 16:39:11 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Am 14.05.25 um 16:27 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
> > On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:48:44 +0100
> > Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> +cc s390 people, kvm s390 people + lists. sorry for noise but get_maintainers.pl
> >> says there's a lot of you :)
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, Ignacio Moreno Gonzalez wrote:  
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Due to the line:
> >>>
> >>> include/linux/huge_mm.h:509 '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>'  
> >>
> >> BTW, I didn't notice at the time, but shouldn't this be linux/mman.h? You
> >> shouldn't be importing this header this way generally (only other users are arch
> >> code).
> >>
> >> But at any rate, you will ultimately import the PROT_NONE declaration.
> >>  
> >>>
> >>> there is a name collision in arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c, where 'PROT_NONE' is also defined as value for 'enum prot_type'.  
> >>
> >> That is crazy. Been there since 2022 also...!
> >>  
> >>>
> >>> A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.  
> > 
> > please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
> > PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
> > 
> > if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
> > the mm tree  
> 
> Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
> patch.

I'd rather have PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, since it's a dummy value and not
something that indicates "no protection"

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Christian Borntraeger]

Am 14.05.25 um 16:48 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:

>>>>> A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.
>>>
>>> please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
>>> PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
>>>
>>> if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
>>> the mm tree
>>
>> Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
>> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>> for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
>> patch.
> 
> I'd rather have PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, since it's a dummy value and not
> something that indicates "no protection"

makes sense.

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 04:52:18PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> Am 14.05.25 um 16:48 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
>
> > > > > > A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.
> > > >
> > > > please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
> > > > PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
> > > >
> > > > if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
> > > > the mm tree
> > >
> > > Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
> > > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> > >
> > > for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
> > > patch.
> >
> > I'd rather have PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, since it's a dummy value and not
> > something that indicates "no protection"
>
> makes sense.

Thanks for the quick response guys, did you want us to write the patch?

We can put something together quickly if so and cc you on it.

Ack on the comment above, of course!

Cheers, Lorenzo

Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Claudio Imbrenda]

On Wed, 14 May 2025 17:01:55 +0100
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 04:52:18PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am 14.05.25 um 16:48 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
> >  
> > > > > > > A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.  
> > > > >
> > > > > please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
> > > > > PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
> > > > >
> > > > > if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
> > > > > the mm tree  
> > > >
> > > > Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
> > > > Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> > > >
> > > > for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
> > > > patch.  
> > >
> > > I'd rather have PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, since it's a dummy value and not
> > > something that indicates "no protection"  
> >
> > makes sense.  
> 
> Thanks for the quick response guys, did you want us to write the patch?

yes please

please don't forget to also add the following tags:

Fixes: b3cefd6bf16e ("KVM: s390: Pass initialized arg even if unused")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

> 
> We can put something together quickly if so and cc you on it.

yep

> 
> Ack on the comment above, of course!
> 
> Cheers, Lorenzo