From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, lkp@intel.com
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:55:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z-qCrbNvP2cil6jJ@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250329153242.GAZ-gSmu8qiXufR04k@fat_crate.local>
* Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:18:57PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Linus,
> >
> > Please pull the latest objtool/urgent Git tree from:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git objtool-urgent-2025-03-28
> >
> > # HEAD: ae958b12940bcd4ffa32c44684e4f2878bc5e140 objtool, drm/vmwgfx: Don't ignore vmw_send_msg() for ORC
> >
> > [ Merge note: not all driver fixes below have maintainer acks. ]
>
> Btw, test bot complains:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/202503292202.Sge7ZEUc-lkp@intel.com
AFAICS that particular report is not a new regression, but essentially
a test-bot false positive due to a reporting change, because the
objtool warning output changed.
This can be seen in the full report:
https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202503280703.OARM8SrY-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[22]=-1+0 reg2[22]=-2-160
arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: stack state mismatch: reg1[23]=-1+0 reg2[23]=-2-152
>> arch/loongarch/kernel/traps.o: warning: objtool: show_stack+0xe0: skipping duplicate warning(s)
Note how '>>' is the new warning - the summary line added recently that
suggests that there's more warnings. It appears to me the test-bot
considers the other warnings old regressions, but I couldn't find any
trace of them being reported before. Maybe they weren't Cc:-ed to lkml.
Or maybe these *are* all new warnings. I've Cc:-ed the LKP folks.
To add confusion to confusion, the test bot also incorrectly attributed
ae958b1294 for that new warning line, and incorrectly categorized it as
a 'recent_error':
recent_errors
`-- loongarch-randconfig-001-20250328
`-- arch-loongarch-kernel-traps.o:warning:objtool:show_stack:skipping-duplicate-warning(s)
While the commit that added this new reporting line is:
0a7fb6f07e3a ("objtool: Increase per-function WARN_FUNC() rate limit")
... which is a few weeks old and already upstream. We didn't get a
loongson related test-bot regression report for that commit or any
other commits, other than the weeks-late & self-contradictory report
against ae958b1294.
So something's wonky with the test-bot reporting in this particular
case for loongson, or my parsing thereof.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-31 11:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-28 21:18 [GIT PULL] objtool fixes and updates Ingo Molnar
2025-03-29 15:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-30 22:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-03-30 23:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 1:39 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31 9:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 15:29 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-03-31 16:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01 7:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 11:55 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2025-03-31 12:31 ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 12:44 ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 12:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-03-31 13:27 ` Philip Li
2025-03-31 16:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-03-31 22:17 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01 0:38 ` Philip Li
2025-04-01 2:05 ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-01 4:15 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-01 6:12 ` Tiezhu Yang
2025-04-02 17:48 ` pr-tracker-bot
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=Z-qCrbNvP2cil6jJ@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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