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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C061C19F2A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:48:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233985AbiHCIs0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 04:48:26 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46064 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233943AbiHCIsX (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2022 04:48:23 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com (mail-wm1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD7E11D31F for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 01:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id r67-20020a1c4446000000b003a34ac64bdfso204223wma.1 for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2022 01:48:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=qKqo0h9Lva8dP5VOOSo7i61+QrtY8gPr4MgxUM+NaXM=; b=K1+QwMMF0ygQFYNEgKo0BPINIfeDi/62w29AVXiJ+sIPO5wYV7vOKSvv4nkNCLXUYd mpBPtDtwoH1NBnjlBqlWtVec1LV7ZWeJ0TeRNSVIJi7+YntM4Z0tf34zRJMcc0WoYzmN PdEVxwu1atJIytuGyf3tF6oDOybJYk/8SWK+kd8v6fvxu5fqODnJFPI5KtXERKSbDljv XPwFvWejnp8S3o12ZlA9tKbpn57sEnkWliG64dOnXEqKtf5FJ/2meiXN+MyDT40B0iNJ 8Xe8/wEgxquFW3z0BRp7MYS4I0OhVqrTJ6ATOFcuzBRdKRoFXkho5Kf+YkpO9y6kLhDe JF4g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=qKqo0h9Lva8dP5VOOSo7i61+QrtY8gPr4MgxUM+NaXM=; b=CgmyAHobSc/R2hr9vuD1pETpJcPyIv2I2vfPyJ7w/HwsaK4EnqS9UPbF4QoFy4DWNB FultomXE4QDSQxKC4qGi6LFCba9CZlUXg+vUqB8yXtXk25b+qW6VLC4nTKdNVqVbx9QH YdJD7Jgpkq5YBLstbAfMWL/l798zvSiPMbvHX9v64ZyT1FDCNPmc8LKN/nF/JQEWxube WoNktBDA0ljhOJS+40O6621bplLwAxE27sazjzdQccb6cjO237LQLXMYUzHWUEIt/G4Y igpndSfHbnMr+mlOZNqcwzdaYGbZwPws1POsYBw4JtMu4ymNf8NYntgBfUFEq5RjMc6u f+7w== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0n1YqLHWPPT9yi/5w/2tYwHcBy0OmBHspRFFmQ4ibKmcRnwp/4 1jsLHliXB/BdOnqt0leD8AE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR78xbQ3KK5qK5KyQWJM4Kybr6qyH51YeUilppnNGY+xV1TAQkEXrPe1nRJuq8Z/s0lxwWTh8g== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2981:0:b0:3a2:ffe9:945c with SMTP id p123-20020a1c2981000000b003a2ffe9945cmr2090453wmp.38.1659516501272; Wed, 03 Aug 2022 01:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (84-236-113-167.pool.digikabel.hu. [84.236.113.167]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n18-20020a5d67d2000000b0020fff0ea0a3sm17319128wrw.116.2022.08.03.01.48.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 03 Aug 2022 01:48:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Ingo Molnar Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 10:48:18 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Siddh Raman Pant Cc: x86 , Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel , linux-kernel-mentees Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/numa: Use cpumask_available instead of hardcoded NULL check Message-ID: References: <20220731160913.632092-1-code@siddh.me> <1825f63b142.8968bde3116633.1242410031840350968@siddh.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1825f63b142.8968bde3116633.1242410031840350968@siddh.me> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Siddh Raman Pant wrote: > On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 16:37:44 +0530 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Your fix makes sense I suppose, but I'm wondering how testing didn't > > trigger this warning. > > > > Off-stack isn't a rare config option: > > > > kepler:~/tip> make allmodconfig > > # > > # No change to .config > > # > > kepler:~/tip> grep CPUMASK_OFFSTACK .config > > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y > > kepler:~/tip> > > > > What am I missing? > > Maybe this triggers on certain config options set, or maybe due to new > gcc version? (I'm using gcc-12, I also likely saw while on gcc-11.) > It nevertheless is a helpful warning. > > I just now tried `make defconfig` (default configuration based on > 'x86_64_defconfig') and compiling with `make -j13 all`, and gcc doesn't > give any warning. (CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK isn't even listed in the > .config file produced, grep fails.) Does 'allmodconfig' reproduce the warning for you: $ make allmodconfig $ make arch/x86/mm/numa.o ? If yes, then this could be due to gcc-12, as it doesn't reproduce with gcc-11 for me: gcc version 11.2.0 (Ubuntu 11.2.0-19ubuntu1) Thanks, Ingo