Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jan 2023 09:47:42 -0800 | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Subject | Re: Linux 6.2-rc3 |
| |
On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 12:06:47PM -0600, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Here we are, another week done, and things are starting to look a lot > more normal after that very quiet holiday week that made rc2 so very > small. > > Nothing in particular here stands out: the bulk of this is driver > fixes (networking, gpu, block, virtio - but also usb, fbdev, rdma etc, > so a little bit of everything). That is as should be, and just > matches where the bulk of the code is. > > Outside of the various driver fixes, we've got core networking, some > filesystem fixes (btrfs, cifs, f2fs and nfs), and some perf tooling > work. > > With the rest being mostly selftests and documentation. > > The shortlog is below, plase do give it a good test, and holler if you > find anything. >
Build results: total: 155 pass: 151 fail: 4 Failed builds: powerpc:allmodconfig sh:defconfig sh:shx3_defconfig xtensa:allmodconfig Qemu test results: total: 500 pass: 500 fail: 0
No change with compile tests (included again below for reference). The good news is that the runtime/boot tests now all pass.
Guenter
--- Build errors ============
Building powerpc:allmodconfig ... failed -------------- Error log: In file included from include/linux/string.h:253, from arch/powerpc/include/asm/paca.h:16, from arch/powerpc/include/asm/current.h:13, from include/linux/thread_info.h:23, from include/asm-generic/preempt.h:5, from ./arch/powerpc/include/generated/asm/preempt.h:1, from include/linux/preempt.h:78, from include/linux/spinlock.h:56, from include/linux/wait.h:9, from include/linux/wait_bit.h:8, from include/linux/fs.h:6, from fs/f2fs/inline.c:9: fs/f2fs/inline.c: In function 'f2fs_move_inline_dirents': include/linux/fortify-string.h:59:33: error: '__builtin_memset' pointer overflow between offset [28, 898293814] and size [-898293787, -1] [-Werror=array-bounds] 59 | #define __underlying_memset __builtin_memset | ^ include/linux/fortify-string.h:337:9: note: in expansion of macro '__underlying_memset' 337 | __underlying_memset(p, c, __fortify_size); \ | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/fortify-string.h:345:25: note: in expansion of macro '__fortify_memset_chk' 345 | #define memset(p, c, s) __fortify_memset_chk(p, c, s, \ | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fs/f2fs/inline.c:430:9: note: in expansion of macro 'memset' 430 | memset(dst.bitmap + src.nr_bitmap, 0, dst.nr_bitmap - src.nr_bitmap); | ^~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
xtensa:allmodconfig
Building xtensa:allmodconfig ... failed -------------- Error log: kernel/kcsan/kcsan_test.c: In function '__report_matches': kernel/kcsan/kcsan_test.c:257:1: error: the frame size of 1680 bytes is larger than 1536 bytes
Bisect for both points to commit e240e53ae0abb08 ("mm, slub: add CONFIG_SLUB_TINY"). Reverting it on its own is not possible, but reverting the following two patches fixes the problem.
149b6fa228ed mm, slob: rename CONFIG_SLOB to CONFIG_SLOB_DEPRECATED e240e53ae0ab mm, slub: add CONFIG_SLUB_TINY
Context: CONFIG_SLUB_TINY is enabled with allmodconfig builds. This enables some previously disabled configurations and disables some previously enabled configurations.
--- sh:defconfig sh:shx3_defconfig
Building sh:defconfig ... failed -------------- Error log: In file included from <command-line>: In function 'follow_pmd_mask', inlined from 'follow_pud_mask' at mm/gup.c:735:9, inlined from 'follow_p4d_mask' at mm/gup.c:752:9, inlined from 'follow_page_mask' at mm/gup.c:809:9: include/linux/compiler_types.h:358:45: error: call to '__compiletime_assert_263' declared with attribute error: Unsupported access size for {READ,WRITE}_ONCE(). 358 | _compiletime_assert(condition, msg, __compiletime_assert_, __COUNTER__)
Bisect points to commit 0862ff059c9e ("sh/mm: Make pmd_t similar to pte_t"). This commit introduces
-typedef struct { unsigned long long pmd; } pmd_t; +typedef struct { + struct { + unsigned long pmd_low; + unsigned long pmd_high; + }; + unsigned long long pmd; +} pmd_t;
That should probably be "typedef union", not "typedef struct".
| |