Messages in this thread | | | From | Marco Elver <> | Date | Wed, 26 May 2021 00:29:58 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kcov: add __no_sanitize_coverage to fix noinstr for all architectures |
| |
On Wed, 26 May 2021 at 00:23, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote: [...] > [auto build test WARNING on linux/master] > [also build test WARNING on kees/for-next/pstore linus/master v5.13-rc3 next-20210525] > [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] > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Marco-Elver/kcov-add-__no_sanitize_coverage-to-fix-noinstr-for-all-architectures/20210526-020046 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git dd860052c99b1e088352bdd4fb7aef46f8d2ef47 > config: s390-randconfig-r002-20210525 (attached as .config) > compiler: clang version 13.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 99155e913e9bad5f7f8a247f8bb3a3ff3da74af1)
^^^ you're using a Clang pre-release, breakages are expected until Clang 13 is final.
I think there was a thread about this at some point. I guess LKP has decided that testing Clang pre-releases is fair game? I guess it's useful, but this warning here needs to be ignored. It'll go away when you rebuild your pre-release Clang 13 from the latest LLVM main branch.
[...] > >> arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c:182:6: warning: unknown sanitizer 'coverage' ignored [-Wunknown-sanitizers] > void noinstr s390_handle_mcck(void) > ^ > include/linux/compiler_types.h:213:35: note: expanded from macro 'noinstr' > __no_kcsan __no_sanitize_address __no_sanitize_coverage > ^ > include/linux/compiler-clang.h:49:59: note: expanded from macro '__no_sanitize_coverage' > #define __no_sanitize_coverage __attribute__((no_sanitize("coverage"))) > ^
Clang 13 will support the attribute, but this is a pre-release Clang 13 -- so please ignore the report. FWIW, I tested my patch of course with a version of Clang 13 that supports the attribute. :-)
Thanks, -- Marco
| |