Hi all,
After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (sparc64 defconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from include/linux/hugetlb.h:757,
from arch/sparc/mm/hugetlbpage.c:11:
arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h: In function 'huge_ptep_clear_flush':
arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h:27:1: error: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Werror=return-type]
27 | }
| ^
(and many more)
Caused by commit
083af99303b9 ("mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte")
I applied the following hack to make it build.
From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 18:10:56 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte"
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
---
arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h
index b50aa6f8f9ab..0a26cca24232 100644
--- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h
+++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/hugetlb.h
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_get_and_clear(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
static inline pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
+ return *ptep;
}
#define __HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_PTEP_SET_WRPROTECT
--
2.35.1
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 5/12/2022 7:07 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:38:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (arm64 defconfig)
>> failed like this:
>>
>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c: In function 'huge_ptep_clear_flush':
>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_clear_flush'; did you mean 'ptep_clear_flush'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> | ptep_clear_flush
>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pte_t' was expected
>> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:494:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
>> 494 | }
>> | ^
>>
>> Caused by commit
>>
>> 00df1f1a133b ("mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte")
>>
>> interacting with commit
>>
>> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
>>
>> I have applied the following merg fix patch for today.
>>
>> From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>> Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:33:11 +1000
>> Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte"
>>
>> It interacts with commit
>>
>> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
>>
>> from the arm64 tree
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> index 5bdf913dedc7..30f5b76aabe9 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep);
>>
>> ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize);
>> - return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
>> + return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
>> }
>
> Note that after the arm64 commit, get_clear_contig() no longer flushes
> the TLB. So maybe something like:
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> index 30f5b76aabe9..9a999550df8e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> @@ -485,12 +485,15 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> {
> size_t pgsize;
> int ncontig;
> + pte_t orig_pte;
>
> if (!pte_cont(READ_ONCE(*ptep)))
> return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep);
>
> ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize);
> - return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> + orig_pte = get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> + flush_tlb_range(vma, addr, addr + pgsize * ncontig);
> + return orig_pte;
> }
Yes, after checking this fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush
from get_clear_flush()"), I also realized it will miss TLB flush.
So I am not sure I need send a incremental patch to fix this issue? Or
resend my patch set [1] with rebasing on the arm64 changes?
Catalin and Andrew, how do you think? Thanks.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:13:18PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 7:07 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:38:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (arm64 defconfig)
> > > failed like this:
> > >
> > > arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c: In function 'huge_ptep_clear_flush':
> > > arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_clear_flush'; did you mean 'ptep_clear_flush'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > | ptep_clear_flush
> > > arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pte_t' was expected
> > > 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:494:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> > > 494 | }
> > > | ^
> > >
> > > Caused by commit
> > >
> > > 00df1f1a133b ("mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte")
> > >
> > > interacting with commit
> > >
> > > fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
> > >
> > > I have applied the following merg fix patch for today.
> > >
> > > From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> > > Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:33:11 +1000
> > > Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte"
> > >
> > > It interacts with commit
> > >
> > > fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
> > >
> > > from the arm64 tree
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > > index 5bdf913dedc7..30f5b76aabe9 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > > @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > > return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep);
> > > ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize);
> > > - return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > + return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > }
> >
> > Note that after the arm64 commit, get_clear_contig() no longer flushes
> > the TLB. So maybe something like:
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > index 30f5b76aabe9..9a999550df8e 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> > @@ -485,12 +485,15 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > {
> > size_t pgsize;
> > int ncontig;
> > + pte_t orig_pte;
> >
> > if (!pte_cont(READ_ONCE(*ptep)))
> > return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep);
> >
> > ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize);
> > - return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > + orig_pte = get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > + flush_tlb_range(vma, addr, addr + pgsize * ncontig);
> > + return orig_pte;
> > }
>
> Yes, after checking this fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from
> get_clear_flush()"), I also realized it will miss TLB flush.
>
> So I am not sure I need send a incremental patch to fix this issue? Or
> resend my patch set [1] with rebasing on the arm64 changes?
>
> Catalin and Andrew, how do you think? Thanks.
Andrew folding the diff in is fine by me. I presume the mm patches are
applied on top of the rest of linux-next (and the arm64 commits).
--
Catalin
On 5/12/2022 5:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (arm64 defconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c: In function 'huge_ptep_clear_flush':
> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_clear_flush'; did you mean 'ptep_clear_flush'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | ptep_clear_flush
> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pte_t' was expected
> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:494:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> 494 | }
> | ^
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 00df1f1a133b ("mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte")
>
> interacting with commit
>
> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
>
> I have applied the following merg fix patch for today.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:33:11 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte"
>
> It interacts with commit
>
> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()")
>
> from the arm64 tree
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
Thanks. Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Baolin Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> index 5bdf913dedc7..30f5b76aabe9 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
> @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep);
>
> ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize);
> - return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> + return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> }
>
> static int __init hugetlbpage_init(void)
On Thu, 12 May 2022 14:28:18 +0100 Catalin Marinas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > - return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > + orig_pte = get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > + flush_tlb_range(vma, addr, addr + pgsize * ncontig);
> > > + return orig_pte;
> > > }
> >
> > Yes, after checking this fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from
> > get_clear_flush()"), I also realized it will miss TLB flush.
> >
> > So I am not sure I need send a incremental patch to fix this issue? Or
> > resend my patch set [1] with rebasing on the arm64 changes?
> >
> > Catalin and Andrew, how do you think? Thanks.
>
> Andrew folding the diff in is fine by me. I presume the mm patches are
> applied on top of the rest of linux-next (and the arm64 commits).
No, the mm patches are based on
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm master branch,
which is -rc4 or thereabouts.
So one of us needs to ensure that Linus gets that patch after the
second of us merges up. I can't test it so I nominate you ;) Against
linux-next or the mm-everything branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm?