linux-sparse.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

      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).