| Message ID | 20230429155247.12131-1-rdunlap@infradead.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] RISC-V: fix sifive and thead section mismatches in errata | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| conchuod/cover_letter | success | Single patches do not need cover letters |
| conchuod/tree_selection | success | Guessed tree name to be for-next at HEAD 3ec1aafb0ff9 |
| conchuod/fixes_present | success | Fixes tag not required for -next series |
| conchuod/maintainers_pattern | success | MAINTAINERS pattern errors before the patch: 1 and now 1 |
| conchuod/verify_signedoff | success | Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer |
| conchuod/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
| conchuod/build_rv64_clang_allmodconfig | success | Errors and warnings before: 18 this patch: 18 |
| conchuod/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| conchuod/build_rv64_gcc_allmodconfig | success | Errors and warnings before: 18 this patch: 18 |
| conchuod/build_rv32_defconfig | success | Build OK |
| conchuod/dtb_warn_rv64 | success | Errors and warnings before: 3 this patch: 3 |
| conchuod/header_inline | success | No static functions without inline keyword in header files |
| conchuod/checkpatch | warning | WARNING: 'thead' may be misspelled - perhaps 'thread'? |
| conchuod/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| conchuod/build_rv64_nommu_k210_defconfig | success | Build OK |
| conchuod/verify_fixes | success | Fixes tag looks correct |
| conchuod/build_rv64_nommu_virt_defconfig | success | Build OK |
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > --- Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: Reviewed-by: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com>
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > > CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > > In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > > > Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > > Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > > Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > > Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > > Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > > --- > > Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the > original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors > depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? Thanks for changing the fixes tag Randy, Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> Thanks, Conor.
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:24 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > > > When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > > > CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > > > In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > > > > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > > > > > Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > > Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > > > Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > > > Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > > > Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > > > Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > > > --- > > > > Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the > > original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors > > depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: > > Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the > relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? It was weird, my original "fix" (the one listed in this Fixes tag) was needed because while the hwprobe series was clean on Palmer's branch, it generated a "section mismatch" on linux-next. As noted here, it was only with !CONFIG_MODULES, so I explicitly remember generating that config and checking it on linux-next to generate this "fix", and it came out clean. It's like the robots are getting smarter. -Evan
On 4/29/23 10:48, Evan Green wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:24 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when >>>> CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. >>>> In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: >>>> >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) >>>> >>>> Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") >>>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> >>>> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> >>>> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> >>>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> >>>> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> >>>> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org >>>> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> >>>> Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> >>>> --- >>> >>> Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the >>> original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors >>> depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: >> >> Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the >> relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? > > It was weird, my original "fix" (the one listed in this Fixes tag) was > needed because while the hwprobe series was clean on Palmer's branch, > it generated a "section mismatch" on linux-next. As noted here, it was > only with !CONFIG_MODULES, so I explicitly remember generating that > config and checking it on linux-next to generate this "fix", and it > came out clean. It's like the robots are getting smarter. > -Evan I observed the problem in 8 out of 20 randconfig builds, using linux-next 20230427.
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:58 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > On 4/29/23 10:48, Evan Green wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:24 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > >>>> CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > >>>> In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > >>>> > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > >>>> > >>>> Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > >>>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > >>>> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > >>>> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > >>>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > >>>> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > >>>> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > >>>> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > >>>> Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > >>>> --- > >>> > >>> Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the > >>> original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors > >>> depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: > >> > >> Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the > >> relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? > > > > It was weird, my original "fix" (the one listed in this Fixes tag) was > > needed because while the hwprobe series was clean on Palmer's branch, > > it generated a "section mismatch" on linux-next. As noted here, it was > > only with !CONFIG_MODULES, so I explicitly remember generating that > > config and checking it on linux-next to generate this "fix", and it > > came out clean. It's like the robots are getting smarter. > > -Evan > > I observed the problem in 8 out of 20 randconfig builds, > using linux-next 20230427. Oh interesting, so not the stock k210_nommu defconfig. That makes me feel a little better at least. -Evan
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 12:06:19PM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:58 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 4/29/23 10:48, Evan Green wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:24 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > > >> > > >> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > > >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > > >>>> CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > > >>>> In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > >>>> > > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > >>>> > > >>>> Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > >>>> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > > >>>> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > > >>>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > > >>>> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > > >>>> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > >>>> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > > >>>> Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > > >>>> --- > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the > > >>> original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors > > >>> depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: > > >> > > >> Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the > > >> relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? > > > > > > It was weird, my original "fix" (the one listed in this Fixes tag) was > > > needed because while the hwprobe series was clean on Palmer's branch, > > > it generated a "section mismatch" on linux-next. As noted here, it was > > > only with !CONFIG_MODULES, so I explicitly remember generating that > > > config and checking it on linux-next to generate this "fix", and it > > > came out clean. It's like the robots are getting smarter. > > > -Evan > > > > I observed the problem in 8 out of 20 randconfig builds, > > using linux-next 20230427. > > Oh interesting, so not the stock k210_nommu defconfig. That makes me > feel a little better at least. Ohh man, that's a pretty bad config to try use (if that's your default) for build testing stuff. The k210_mmu defconfig doesn't enable anything other than SOC_CANAAN. I could reproduce Randy's issue on defconfig w/ CONFIG_MODULES disabled.
On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 12:11 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 12:06:19PM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:58 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/29/23 10:48, Evan Green wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:24 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:21:39AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > > > >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 8:52 AM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > > > >>>> CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > > > >>>> In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > > >>>> WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > > >>>> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> > > > >>>> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> > > > >>>> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> > > > >>>> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> > > > >>>> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > > >>>> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > > > >>>> Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> > > > >>>> --- > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks, Randy. I'm confused at how I didn't see that when I made the > > > >>> original fix. I feel like repro of these section mismatch errors > > > >>> depend on some other factor I'm not understanding. In any case: > > > >> > > > >> Perhaps you had a cut-down config that did not enable either of the > > > >> relevant ARCH_ options to get those errata compiled? > > > > > > > > It was weird, my original "fix" (the one listed in this Fixes tag) was > > > > needed because while the hwprobe series was clean on Palmer's branch, > > > > it generated a "section mismatch" on linux-next. As noted here, it was > > > > only with !CONFIG_MODULES, so I explicitly remember generating that > > > > config and checking it on linux-next to generate this "fix", and it > > > > came out clean. It's like the robots are getting smarter. > > > > -Evan > > > > > > I observed the problem in 8 out of 20 randconfig builds, > > > using linux-next 20230427. > > > > Oh interesting, so not the stock k210_nommu defconfig. That makes me > > feel a little better at least. > > Ohh man, that's a pretty bad config to try use (if that's your default) > for build testing stuff. The k210_mmu defconfig doesn't enable anything > other than SOC_CANAAN. > I could reproduce Randy's issue on defconfig w/ CONFIG_MODULES disabled. That's the one that caught me before, so I remembered it as being "different". I'll try what you describe above next time I'm hunting for section mismatches. -Evan
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 08:26:19AM -0700, Evan Green wrote: > On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 12:11 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > > Ohh man, that's a pretty bad config to try use (if that's your default) > > for build testing stuff. The k210_mmu defconfig doesn't enable anything > > other than SOC_CANAAN. > > I could reproduce Randy's issue on defconfig w/ CONFIG_MODULES disabled. > > That's the one that caught me before, so I remembered it as being > "different". I'll try what you describe above next time I'm hunting > for section mismatches. By nature of being nommu with lots of stuff disabled, it is a good niche config to test - the nommu stuff mostly gets forgotten about.. On the other hand, it does skip the errata handling stuff which is what caught us out here. Cheers, Conor.
On Sat, 29 Apr 2023 08:52:47 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when > CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. > In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] RISC-V: fix sifive and thead section mismatches in errata https://git.kernel.org/palmer/c/a2a58b5ca124 Best regards,
diff -- a/arch/riscv/errata/sifive/errata.c b/arch/riscv/errata/sifive/errata.c --- a/arch/riscv/errata/sifive/errata.c +++ b/arch/riscv/errata/sifive/errata.c @@ -82,11 +82,9 @@ static void __init_or_module warn_miss_e pr_warn("----------------------------------------------------------------\n"); } -void __init_or_module sifive_errata_patch_func(struct alt_entry *begin, - struct alt_entry *end, - unsigned long archid, - unsigned long impid, - unsigned int stage) +void sifive_errata_patch_func(struct alt_entry *begin, struct alt_entry *end, + unsigned long archid, unsigned long impid, + unsigned int stage) { struct alt_entry *alt; u32 cpu_req_errata; diff -- a/arch/riscv/errata/thead/errata.c b/arch/riscv/errata/thead/errata.c --- a/arch/riscv/errata/thead/errata.c +++ b/arch/riscv/errata/thead/errata.c @@ -83,9 +83,9 @@ static u32 thead_errata_probe(unsigned i return cpu_req_errata; } -void __init_or_module thead_errata_patch_func(struct alt_entry *begin, struct alt_entry *end, - unsigned long archid, unsigned long impid, - unsigned int stage) +void thead_errata_patch_func(struct alt_entry *begin, struct alt_entry *end, + unsigned long archid, unsigned long impid, + unsigned int stage) { struct alt_entry *alt; u32 cpu_req_errata = thead_errata_probe(stage, archid, impid);
When CONFIG_MODULES is set, __init_or_module becomes <empty>, but when CONFIG_MODULES is not set, __init_or_module becomes __init. In the latter case, it causes section mismatch warnings: WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> sifive_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o: section mismatch in reference: riscv_fill_cpu_mfr_info (section: .text) -> thead_errata_patch_func (section: .init.text) Fixes: bb3f89487fd9 ("RISC-V: hwprobe: Remove __init on probe_vendor_features()") Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu> Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> --- v2: use corrected Fixes: commit info (thanks Conor) arch/riscv/errata/sifive/errata.c | 8 +++----- arch/riscv/errata/thead/errata.c | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)