From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, FAKE_REPLY_C,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F09AAC0650F for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:51:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C150B214C6 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:51:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Noa7Ufr0" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729561AbfHEQvb (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:51:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:41453 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726691AbfHEQva (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:51:30 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id m9so36567138pls.8 for ; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 09:51:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version :content-disposition:user-agent; bh=5zUWHx+LrFV3C0bnUHT30FHcGUBfZsb1VG1F9+ZjuoA=; b=Noa7Ufr0hVzoayXF9x6jJGFsbhvr3vPdtarSirGSnvURIOQ51qw48ykBpQ2cMrCaXY VGAyV5mJymfsjTnexQ0I5YQc7lUuJv2hLRZWW7MnBIdB6bK0mOG6I4C0jYgrJ1PaPT2t 9A8GUROtzX1bKw4or1409wz4OFpwoQNfItdOkEZODX6PPxFzLptEVbLdix1h/KrFFmXA +VTeWUlGM3p6hkUStIeyrfbS/PSoihlkv25+JmiDDG5Hqe+KIvTSbLV3I4YYrfMTff3X IVBiGJpZDLtLsVX37F95PDgym/piSyNhgaLYSHZHjaXykBf+jS4ZyAfg52GMzhrLo9+m fe9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mime-version:content-disposition:user-agent; bh=5zUWHx+LrFV3C0bnUHT30FHcGUBfZsb1VG1F9+ZjuoA=; b=OM0AtL4foEJYJFh4K7ROT1xNO9uDCOuCG3Ew4vn2dcxpa+kuD6Qva8kmmhcs+YKJ+X e5LwZ0cO9P5kMEe63551yuaxAgW91SvcthFDjIS+TjGy5/LbhLhI0u2LJUwGtxD07+pN FambsUTz6sO8y86eCaECsMaE7PLwGHLPNZ2OJRhwF+Nq0d/ZAaRO6uZI0hbjJi+NYXhn Jj3ocBgg9BG5xRVBskDVDMGM/iagAw4XzbS0qMEx+fzPf6+dSflAj8b0Sjce3oziRo10 QSnDt2pRbfNfY0zpIU16ji9wSYf4InSBnciQbFQxZRiWGd7eQ+JaDltwbZ3SWm5cf+hL LIYA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVzFWfVpxYk87mdoDBERZNC2QXDnAklzPDCe5AV4hMs+D32eKlC n4K3xan+uGsJETSxcMlvC+YU+phx X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzy81fXkuMzGoTo970O0q9C01wGi1nra3HSIGZbYZyP5dPsGPB0G3HBOYoKGbcSB28d1WfAXA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:244:: with SMTP id 62mr50990084plc.243.1565023890066; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 09:51:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s24sm85105440pfh.133.2019.08.05.09.51.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Aug 2019 09:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 09:51:28 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] page flags: prioritize kasan bits over last-cpuid Message-ID: <20190805165128.GA23762@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 09:49:02PM -0700, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > ARM64 randdconfig builds regularly run into a build error, especially > when NUMA_BALANCING and SPARSEMEM are enabled but not SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP: > > #error "KASAN: not enough bits in page flags for tag" > > The last-cpuid bits are already contitional on the available space, so > the result of the calculation is a bit random on whether they were > already left out or not. > > Adding the kasan tag bits before last-cpuid makes it much more likely to > end up with a successful build here, and should be reliable for > randconfig at least, as long as that does not randomize NR_CPUS or > NODES_SHIFT but uses the defaults. > > In order for the modified check to not trigger in the x86 vdso32 code > where all constants are wrong (building with -m32), enclose all the > definitions with an #ifdef. > This results in ./include/linux/page-flags-layout.h:95:2: error: #error "Not enough bits in page flags" #error "Not enough bits in page flags" when trying to build mipsel64:fuloong2e_defconfig. Guenter