From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 50C5B1D5ABF; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 10:11:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729851104; cv=none; b=r0ehM5U9JvBboOJmKkMTS+F4e6W48t9RNXMjm/6jTXmLL3RAUmypFGAQZe0DQA8naNxXA0pFW64Xsfebko/rR1zCZAePVL4InDcWoaw4vua6tHTk4SJXM6wgrF6roDdKySlM0klMG4Ukr1aoa/SVcPhvmBd4A7uyE9SdktKTGgc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729851104; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6Ti/rPa9VPGsl7W96k8PIOoxkRU8dllSjyzxVDqDHSk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=onZ++9Dyor/vP4t9LULQu0G4KoMAsFkLCJpoRyi50yqg0fOlzZZULlq5EwGJ70L7NFV7nGHkMkrNwKjYrbDMJswld4cVVYQF3l7XMInCaGENWoJ5xhKbvgSS896q/ku+ZOXxZEPOE7eFSm30ocmd9nOE48/cJZHz/uOF18HtZFg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=GoXxPioY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="GoXxPioY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76075C4CEC3; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 10:11:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1729851103; bh=6Ti/rPa9VPGsl7W96k8PIOoxkRU8dllSjyzxVDqDHSk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=GoXxPioYzk31+wt+0+IRRRxkQF6KQCb9P4pFGaCK5JWftl0Tm7oqWs72+onb32YiF v3UQ4dcsXWsw0Z/TSgyBCMKwdaOdpCAhJuVWXhsu3bwE7BOonosEF5HqKCX3lr7EHI G/baMwPa7KAL6mqSjxnwXmb4XhUpmKawhwBRilU8YEmbLT2t+sMIymb9pkSWyhZcOY J+4hqY7Wu8dz/H6sttVzKqaE6IuYatcMCSb+H7OAtC2wUckWwBbBEMUK4+ticQRVpu QuLuYRl97UR9RmBq98gd9QAAtKk1VzwzCaXyZjeoiYSkG6CRSLRo+VzpCYsTHXakWs p50HS9LD45TyA== From: Puranjay Mohan To: kernel test robot , Albert Ou , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrew Morton , Andrii Nakryiko , bpf@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Borkmann , "David S. Miller" , Eduard Zingerman , Eric Dumazet , Hao Luo , Helge Deller , Jakub Kicinski , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Jiri Olsa , John Fastabend , KP Singh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Martin KaFai Lau , Mykola Lysenko , Palmer Dabbelt , Paolo Abeni , Paul Walmsley , Shuah Khan , Song Liu , Stanislav Fomichev Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, Linux Memory Management List , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] bpf: bpf_csum_diff: optimize and homogenize for all archs In-Reply-To: <202410251552.LR73LP4V-lkp@intel.com> References: <20241023153922.86909-3-puranjay@kernel.org> <202410251552.LR73LP4V-lkp@intel.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 10:11:11 +0000 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain kernel test robot writes: > Hi Puranjay, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Puranjay-Mohan/net-checksum-move-from32to16-to-generic-header/20241023-234347 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241023153922.86909-3-puranjay%40kernel.org > patch subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] bpf: bpf_csum_diff: optimize and homogenize for all archs > config: i386-randconfig-061-20241025 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241025/202410251552.LR73LP4V-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/20241025/202410251552.LR73LP4V-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/202410251552.LR73LP4V-lkp@intel.com/ > > sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) > net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct sock_filter const *filter @@ got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter @@ > net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: expected struct sock_filter const *filter > net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter > net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct sock_filter const *filter @@ got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter @@ > net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: expected struct sock_filter const *filter > net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter > net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] daddr @@ got unsigned int [usertype] ipv4_nh @@ > net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] daddr > net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: got unsigned int [usertype] ipv4_nh > net/core/filter.c:10993:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_filter_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11000:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_filter_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11004:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'tc_cls_act_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11013:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'tc_cls_act_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11017:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'xdp_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11029:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11035:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11039:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_in_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11045:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_in_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11049:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_out_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11055:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_out_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11059:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_xmit_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11066:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_xmit_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11070:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11076:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11079:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11085:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11088:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11094:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11097:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sock_ops_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11103:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sock_ops_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11106:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11113:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11116:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_msg_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11123:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_msg_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11126:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'flow_dissector_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11132:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'flow_dissector_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11460:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_reuseport_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11466:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_reuseport_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11668:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_lookup_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:11672:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_lookup_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static? > net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff > net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] old @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@ > net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] old > net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] new @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] new > net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@ > net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff > net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@ > net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@ > net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from > net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@ > net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to > net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to >>> net/core/filter.c:2023:48: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) @@ expected unsigned int sum @@ got restricted __wsum @@ > net/core/filter.c:2023:48: sparse: expected unsigned int sum > net/core/filter.c:2023:48: sparse: got restricted __wsum > net/core/filter.c:2026:52: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) @@ expected unsigned int sum @@ got restricted __wsum @@ > net/core/filter.c:2026:52: sparse: expected unsigned int sum > net/core/filter.c:2026:52: sparse: got restricted __wsum > net/core/filter.c:2029:40: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different base types) @@ expected unsigned int sum @@ got restricted __wsum @@ > net/core/filter.c:2029:40: sparse: expected unsigned int sum > net/core/filter.c:2029:40: sparse: got restricted __wsum > net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __wsum [usertype] seed @@ > net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: expected unsigned long long > net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: got restricted __wsum [usertype] seed > net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __wsum [usertype] csum @@ > net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: expected unsigned long long > net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: got restricted __wsum [usertype] csum > > vim +2023 net/core/filter.c > > 2009 > 2010 BPF_CALL_5(bpf_csum_diff, __be32 *, from, u32, from_size, > 2011 __be32 *, to, u32, to_size, __wsum, seed) > 2012 { > 2013 /* This is quite flexible, some examples: > 2014 * > 2015 * from_size == 0, to_size > 0, seed := csum --> pushing data > 2016 * from_size > 0, to_size == 0, seed := csum --> pulling data > 2017 * from_size > 0, to_size > 0, seed := 0 --> diffing data > 2018 * > 2019 * Even for diffing, from_size and to_size don't need to be equal. > 2020 */ > 2021 > 2022 if (from_size && to_size) >> 2023 return csum_from32to16(csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed), > 2024 csum_partial(from, from_size, 0))); > 2025 if (to_size) > 2026 return csum_from32to16(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed)); > 2027 > 2028 if (from_size) > 2029 return csum_from32to16(~csum_partial(from, from_size, ~seed)); > 2030 > 2031 return seed; > 2032 } > 2033 This file has a lot of such sparse warnings. Specifically, to fix the warning introduced by me, I can apply the following diff: --- >8 --- diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c index e00bec7de9ed..b94037f29b2a 100644 --- a/net/core/filter.c +++ b/net/core/filter.c @@ -2019,16 +2019,18 @@ BPF_CALL_5(bpf_csum_diff, __be32 *, from, u32, from_size, * Even for diffing, from_size and to_size don't need to be equal. */ + __wsum ret = seed; + if (from_size && to_size) - return csum_from32to16(csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed), - csum_partial(from, from_size, 0))); + ret = csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed), csum_partial(from, from_size, 0)); + if (to_size) - return csum_from32to16(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed)); + ret = csum_partial(to, to_size, seed); if (from_size) - return csum_from32to16(~csum_partial(from, from_size, ~seed)); + ret = ~csum_partial(from, from_size, ~seed); - return seed; + return csum_from32to16((__force unsigned int)ret); } --- 8< --- If others feel that fixing these warnings is useful, I can send another version with above diff. I will then also send a separate patch to fix all other such warnings in this file. Thanks, Puranjay --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIoEARYKADIWIQQ3wHGvVs/5bdl78BKwwPkjG3B2nQUCZxtuwBQccHVyYW5qYXlA a2VybmVsLm9yZwAKCRCwwPkjG3B2nfkyAP4imd310ZR1kDuVxB4CsHRlzISGXk8D YIv2XeoC6q7YkQEAr854TBZtq4tB7ZjChtXhWWuntX12z/pN6VJ2Jpru1gA= =CR+Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--