Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:2 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:2;
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:33:05 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        muchun.song@linux.dev, songmuchun@bytedance.com,
        fam.zheng@bytedance.com, liangma@liangbit.com,
        punit.agrawal@bytedance.com,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: hugetlb: Only prep and add allocated folios for
 non-gigantic pages
Message-ID: <20231019043305.GB14965@google.com>
References: <20231009145605.2150897-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com>
 <20231010012345.GA108129@monkey>
 <20231012000327.GA1855399@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
 <20231012145318.GA5127@monkey>
 <20231013001203.GA3812@monkey>
 <20231014000450.GA253713@monkey>
 <CAKwvOdm9xKGQzi6_j=gGZCEmKJe6b9o8+jen1oEeAhyjcaSnxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20231018222003.GA21776@monkey>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231018222003.GA21776@monkey>
Precedence: bulk

On (23/10/18 15:20), Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > I think you need to initialize h, otherwise what value is passed to
> > prep_and_add_bootmem_folios if the loop is not run because the list is
> > empty.  The compiler sees `h` is only given a value in the loop, so
> > the loop must be run.  That's obviously hazardous, but the compiler
> > assumes there's no UB. At least that's my limited understanding
> > looking at the IR diff Nathan got me in
> > https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1946.
> 
> Thanks for looking closer at this Nick and Nathan!
> 
> I think you are saying the compiler is running the loop because it wants
> to initialize h before passing the value to another function.  It does
> this even if the explicit loop entry condition is false.  Is that correct?

The loop is getting promoted to "infinite" loop, there is no
&pos->member != (head) condition check in the generated code
at all (at least on my machine).

I wish we could at least get the "possibly uninitialized variable"
warning from the compiler in this case, which we'd translate to
"hold my beer, I'm going to try one thing".