From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F50F154BF0; Wed, 9 Oct 2024 05:09:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728450577; cv=none; b=Ce5ONdv3ogm+S50J0yn0zzFXAkVQ40L/1UZZ0vIFTpuJAF2mHDJE/85MeQCu121jmXjlp11byQVtBmisIJvla8qOEioxxvChavprRcI/tVH/pfGk6z6nbe7iMqM5B9WcP7cNXIwz4dhAoYLrAAl5rmbBLqcqvqtrOYDIGYpy9pQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728450577; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cRQu6dSg+KXJRcdUXDiLT0pDKaq08XlND9Hd5qQoN7o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cAzY25c8JBfRXXp0rHTrFWtCW/zO5SPPzc5A8Q+WQ0hPCtIHjd/N5toGbz0DU53qt0zgIphtaDqua+VkPFVNgmaXFcg2YoyZfGeb/dEb7CDCRLD6L5EEEa+rzde390xH6LsoVCNpk+KpVZNXCRvbtYwMVgUD4utVJhq6dE4UFsU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=ipnkGCB2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="ipnkGCB2" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1728450576; x=1759986576; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=cRQu6dSg+KXJRcdUXDiLT0pDKaq08XlND9Hd5qQoN7o=; b=ipnkGCB2eJuCDqeWFtO8AvZWwwLUaBYVRYpXEmiZf9FRRLdH/n3oQqkR qOtJRp5SMS7q/kT22z1AgTPcHK05Huj6PP413mPOzeo3IujUzA/4hfIN9 vbPmnHa0JRzkOX9aAb58ss/pCUzy9jPJZJLpk2q0h+CuEAIztUMxzP5Lk 5gvWu/5WaCZOzeKdXXJPRGg2zLaunUGDRckkBQ8nIiRksjndd4ch5lmXh htFrtFc9wg5bau6n2Lx2zAcvrD3sy77N8zcMrVVXSzfNZXTo/7n7JosXz PqoWvriuEtt4BCau3nxe6EgXRXF1wQCI3xeDXV4z6GEo1vIWaQU9EPvQU w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: YVQDmb5YQCqva7gB0J+Dcw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +1ziRAYHQManyVWkfxphnA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11219"; a="31425392" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,189,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="31425392" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by orvoesa107.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Oct 2024 22:09:33 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Qef3H+ohRvWqoYtBMJ+aaw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: mKvwFVhwSmClTBEkXo/fYQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,189,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="75995877" Received: from lkp-server01.sh.intel.com (HELO a48cf1aa22e8) ([10.239.97.150]) by orviesa010.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Oct 2024 22:09:28 -0700 Received: from kbuild by a48cf1aa22e8 with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1syOww-0008lO-11; Wed, 09 Oct 2024 05:09:26 +0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 13:09:16 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Jason Xing , davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, willemb@google.com, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 8/9] net-timestamp: add bpf framework for rx timestamps Message-ID: <202410091245.zCD0FszC-lkp@intel.com> References: <20241008095109.99918-9-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241008095109.99918-9-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Hi Jason, kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: [auto build test WARNING on net-next/main] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Jason-Xing/net-timestamp-add-bpf-infrastructure-to-allow-exposing-more-information-later/20241008-175458 base: net-next/main patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241008095109.99918-9-kerneljasonxing%40gmail.com patch subject: [PATCH net-next 8/9] net-timestamp: add bpf framework for rx timestamps config: x86_64-randconfig-122-20241009 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241009/202410091245.zCD0FszC-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241009/202410091245.zCD0FszC-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202410091245.zCD0FszC-lkp@intel.com/ sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) >> net/ipv4/tcp.c:2297:36: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different modifiers) @@ expected struct sock *sk @@ got struct sock const *sk @@ net/ipv4/tcp.c:2297:36: sparse: expected struct sock *sk net/ipv4/tcp.c:2297:36: sparse: got struct sock const *sk vim +2297 net/ipv4/tcp.c 2288 2289 /* Similar to __sock_recv_timestamp, but does not require an skb */ 2290 void tcp_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, const struct sock *sk, 2291 struct scm_timestamping_internal *tss) 2292 { 2293 int new_tstamp = sock_flag(sk, SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW); 2294 u32 tsflags = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_tsflags); 2295 bool has_timestamping = false; 2296 > 2297 if (tcp_bpf_recv_timestamp(sk, tss)) 2298 return; 2299 2300 if (tss->ts[0].tv_sec || tss->ts[0].tv_nsec) { 2301 if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_RCVTSTAMP)) { 2302 if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS)) { 2303 if (new_tstamp) { 2304 struct __kernel_timespec kts = { 2305 .tv_sec = tss->ts[0].tv_sec, 2306 .tv_nsec = tss->ts[0].tv_nsec, 2307 }; 2308 put_cmsg(msg, SOL_SOCKET, SO_TIMESTAMPNS_NEW, 2309 sizeof(kts), &kts); 2310 } else { 2311 struct __kernel_old_timespec ts_old = { 2312 .tv_sec = tss->ts[0].tv_sec, 2313 .tv_nsec = tss->ts[0].tv_nsec, 2314 }; 2315 put_cmsg(msg, SOL_SOCKET, SO_TIMESTAMPNS_OLD, 2316 sizeof(ts_old), &ts_old); 2317 } 2318 } else { 2319 if (new_tstamp) { 2320 struct __kernel_sock_timeval stv = { 2321 .tv_sec = tss->ts[0].tv_sec, 2322 .tv_usec = tss->ts[0].tv_nsec / 1000, 2323 }; 2324 put_cmsg(msg, SOL_SOCKET, SO_TIMESTAMP_NEW, 2325 sizeof(stv), &stv); 2326 } else { 2327 struct __kernel_old_timeval tv = { 2328 .tv_sec = tss->ts[0].tv_sec, 2329 .tv_usec = tss->ts[0].tv_nsec / 1000, 2330 }; 2331 put_cmsg(msg, SOL_SOCKET, SO_TIMESTAMP_OLD, 2332 sizeof(tv), &tv); 2333 } 2334 } 2335 } 2336 2337 if (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE && 2338 (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE || 2339 !(tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER))) 2340 has_timestamping = true; 2341 else 2342 tss->ts[0] = (struct timespec64) {0}; 2343 } 2344 2345 if (tss->ts[2].tv_sec || tss->ts[2].tv_nsec) { 2346 if (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE && 2347 (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE || 2348 !(tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER))) 2349 has_timestamping = true; 2350 else 2351 tss->ts[2] = (struct timespec64) {0}; 2352 } 2353 2354 if (has_timestamping) { 2355 tss->ts[1] = (struct timespec64) {0}; 2356 if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW)) 2357 put_cmsg_scm_timestamping64(msg, tss); 2358 else 2359 put_cmsg_scm_timestamping(msg, tss); 2360 } 2361 } 2362 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki