[PATCH v4 5/5] maple_tree: add a test checking storing null
Wei Yang
richard.weiyang at gmail.com
Thu Oct 31 16:04:36 PDT 2024
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 07:17:28AM -0400, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>* Wei Yang <richard.weiyang at gmail.com> [241031 04:02]:
>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 11:29:39AM -0400, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>> >* Wei Yang <richard.weiyang at gmail.com> [241022 19:32]:
>> >> On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 01:37:50AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> >> >Hi Wei,
>> >> >
>> >> >kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
>> >> >
>> >> >[auto build test WARNING on akpm-mm/mm-nonmm-unstable]
>> >> >[also build test WARNING on akpm-mm/mm-everything linus/master v6.12-rc4 next-20241022]
>> >> >[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
>> >> >And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
>> >> >https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>> >> >
>> >> >url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Wei-Yang/maple_tree-print-empty-for-an-empty-tree-on-mt_dump/20241019-103832
>> >> >base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-nonmm-unstable
>> >> >patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241019023716.4516-6-richard.weiyang%40gmail.com
>> >> >patch subject: [PATCH v4 5/5] maple_tree: add a test checking storing null
>> >> >config: x86_64-randconfig-123-20241022 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241023/202410230105.UApdwd9S-lkp@intel.com/config)
>> >> >compiler: clang version 18.1.8 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 3b5b5c1ec4a3095ab096dd780e84d7ab81f3d7ff)
>> >> >reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241023/202410230105.UApdwd9S-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 <lkp at intel.com>
>> >> >| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202410230105.UApdwd9S-lkp@intel.com/
>> >> >
>> >> >sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>> >> >>> lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void const *entry @@ got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root @@
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: expected void const *entry
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root
>> >> >>> lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void const *entry @@ got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root @@
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: expected void const *entry
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1456:9: sparse: got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void const *entry @@ got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root @@
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: expected void const *entry
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected void const *entry @@ got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root @@
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: expected void const *entry
>> >> > lib/test_maple_tree.c:1468:9: sparse: got void [noderef] __rcu *ma_root
>> >> >
>> >> >vim +1456 lib/test_maple_tree.c
>> >> >
>> >> > 1389
>> >> > 1390 static noinline void __init check_store_null(struct maple_tree *mt)
>> >> > 1391 {
>> >> > 1392 MA_STATE(mas, mt, 0, ULONG_MAX);
>> >> > 1393
>> >> > 1394 /*
>> >> > 1395 * Store NULL at range [0, ULONG_MAX] to an empty tree should result
>> >> > 1396 * in an empty tree
>> >> > 1397 */
>> >> > 1398 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1399 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1400 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1401 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> > 1402 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1403 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1404
>> >> > 1405 /*
>> >> > 1406 * Store NULL at any range to an empty tree should result in an empty
>> >> > 1407 * tree
>> >> > 1408 */
>> >> > 1409 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1410 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1411 mas_set_range(&mas, 3, 10);
>> >> > 1412 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1413 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> > 1414 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1415 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1416
>> >> > 1417 /*
>> >> > 1418 * Store NULL at range [0, ULONG_MAX] to a single entry tree should
>> >> > 1419 * result in an empty tree
>> >> > 1420 */
>> >> > 1421 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1422 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1423 mas_set(&mas, 0);
>> >> > 1424 mas_store_gfp(&mas, &mas, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1425 mas_set_range(&mas, 0, ULONG_MAX);
>> >> > 1426 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1427 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> > 1428 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1429 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1430
>> >> > 1431 /*
>> >> > 1432 * Store NULL at range [0, n] to a single entry tree should
>> >> > 1433 * result in an empty tree
>> >> > 1434 */
>> >> > 1435 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1436 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1437 mas_set(&mas, 0);
>> >> > 1438 mas_store_gfp(&mas, &mas, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1439 mas_set_range(&mas, 0, 5);
>> >> > 1440 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1441 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> > 1442 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1443 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1444
>> >> > 1445 /*
>> >> > 1446 * Store NULL at range [m, n] where m > 0 to a single entry tree
>> >> > 1447 * should still be a single entry tree
>> >> > 1448 */
>> >> > 1449 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1450 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1451 mas_set(&mas, 0);
>> >> > 1452 mas_store_gfp(&mas, &mas, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1453 mas_set_range(&mas, 2, 5);
>> >> > 1454 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1455 MT_BUG_ON(mt, mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> >> 1456 MT_BUG_ON(mt, xa_is_node(mt->ma_root));
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>> >>
>> >> Will fix it to xa_is_node(mas_root(&mas)) in next version.
>> >
>> >By the looks of the bot output, there are quite a lot of existing cases
>> >of this in the test code.
>> >
>>
>> Hi, Liam
>>
>> Thanks for your review. I may not follow you.
>>
>> I saw you add you RB. Do you prefer me to spin a new round with this adjusted
>> or the current version is fine?
>
>Please fix what you added. The rest will need to eventually be fixed,
>but someone can do that later.
>
Got it, thanks.
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > 1457 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1458 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1459
>> >> > 1460 /*
>> >> > 1461 * Store NULL at range [0, ULONG_MAX] to a tree with node should
>> >> > 1462 * result in an empty tree
>> >> > 1463 */
>> >> > 1464 mt_init_flags(mt, MT_FLAGS_ALLOC_RANGE);
>> >> > 1465 mas_lock(&mas);
>> >> > 1466 mas_set_range(&mas, 1, 3);
>> >> > 1467 mas_store_gfp(&mas, &mas, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1468 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !xa_is_node(mt->ma_root));
>> >> > 1469 mas_set_range(&mas, 0, ULONG_MAX);
>> >> > 1470 mas_store_gfp(&mas, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >> > 1471 MT_BUG_ON(mt, !mtree_empty(mt));
>> >> > 1472 mas_unlock(&mas);
>> >> > 1473 mtree_destroy(mt);
>> >> > 1474 }
>> >> > 1475
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
>> >> >https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Wei Yang
>> >> Help you, Help me
>>
>> --
>> Wei Yang
>> Help you, Help me
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
More information about the maple-tree
mailing list