From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, lkp@intel.com,
oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] x86: Cure tons of sparse warnings (mostly __percpu)
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 12:08:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZeWrqNcbSFJrQddR@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240303235029.555787150@linutronix.de>
* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> A recent 0-day report about new __percpu related sparse warnings made me
> look deeper into it after I dismissed the report as bogus initially.
>
> It turned out that sparse is actually right and all of these warnings (not
> only the most recent ones) are valid and got ignored. Some of them for many
> years.
>
> The worst offender is an UP build because that maps the per CPU cpu_info to
> boot_cpu_data, which is regular data.
>
> As a consequence all per CPU accessors which look like legit code and are
> legit code in the SMP build are causing sparse to emit warnings.
>
> This series addresses this by:
>
> - Adding the missing __percpu annotations all over the place
>
> - Curing the UP madness by exposing a proper per CPU cpu_info for the
> price of wasting 320 byte of memory.
>
> Even if the size police will hate me for that, this cures most of
> the madness in one go and avoids to add more hideous macro mess
> similar to the completely bogus cpu_data() one which should have
> never been there in the first place.
The market of UP-only systems running an upstream Linux kernel is shrinking
fast, so I doubt this is a real concern.
> I know that there are people who think that size matters, but the
> only things which really matter in software are correctness and
> maintainability. The latter simply forbids to add more hideous macro
> mess just to avoid wasting 320 bytes of memory for something which
> is mostly a reminiscence of the good old days...
>
> - Fixing a few obvious non __percpu related warnings which stood out
> prominently.
>
> That reduces the sparse warnings in arch/x86 significantly.
Great - there's also the side benefit of reduction in <asm/processor.h>
complexity via patch #2, which is great for ongoing work to reduce header
depdency hell ...
I've applied your Sparse fixes to tip:x86/cleanups straight away, so they
have a chance to make it into v6.9.
Thanks,
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-04 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-04 10:12 [patch 0/9] x86: Cure tons of sparse warnings (mostly __percpu) Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 1/9] perf/x86/amd/uncore: Fix __percpu annotation Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 2/9] x86/msr: Prepare for including percpu.h Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 3/9] x86/msr: Add missing __percpu annotations Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 4/9] smp: Consolidate smp_prepare_boot_cpu() Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 5/9] x86: Cure per CPU madness on UP Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-15 16:17 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-15 16:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-03-15 17:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-15 17:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-15 22:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-15 23:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-03-16 1:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-16 1:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-03-16 21:34 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-03-17 21:03 ` David Laight
2024-03-18 11:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-18 17:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-18 19:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-03-19 16:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-19 18:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-16 0:56 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-20 8:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-20 15:46 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-21 11:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-21 14:06 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-21 16:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 6/9] x86/uaccess: Add missing __force to casts in __access_ok() and valid_user_address() Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 7/9] x86/cpu: Use EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL_GPL() for x86_spec_ctrl_current Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 8/9] x86/cpu: Provide a declaration for itlb_multihit_kvm_mitigation Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 10:12 ` [patch 9/9] x86/callthunks: Use EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL_GPL() for per CPU variables Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-04 11:08 ` Ingo Molnar [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=ZeWrqNcbSFJrQddR@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).