From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [willy-pagecache:for-next 60/69] fs/ntfs/aops.c:378:12: warning: stack frame size (2216) exceeds limit (1024) in 'ntfs_read_folio'
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 11:00:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnAcLApzs6frds2n@dev-arch.thelio-3990X> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Ym2rzWiP8iNRHWxS@casper.infradead.org>
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 10:36:13PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 01:11:43PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > >> fs/ntfs/aops.c:378:12: warning: stack frame size (2216) exceeds limit (1024) in 'ntfs_read_folio' [-Wframe-larger-than]
> > static int ntfs_read_folio(struct file *file, struct folio *folio)
> > ^
> > 1 warning generated.
>
> Am I getting this warning because I changed the name of the function?
> Or did I do something Bad?
I assume so. There have been other reports of high stack usage in this
function, which it seems Arnd narrowed down to 64K pages (or 256K pages
in this case):
https://lore.kernel.org/20210927141815.1711736-1-arnd@kernel.org/
https://lore.kernel.org/202103280658.kByZmw5Q-lkp@intel.com/
Cheers,
Nathan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [willy-pagecache:for-next 60/69] fs/ntfs/aops.c:378:12: warning: stack frame size (2216) exceeds limit (1024) in 'ntfs_read_folio'
Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 11:00:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnAcLApzs6frds2n@dev-arch.thelio-3990X> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Ym2rzWiP8iNRHWxS@casper.infradead.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 812 bytes --]
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 10:36:13PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 01:11:43PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > >> fs/ntfs/aops.c:378:12: warning: stack frame size (2216) exceeds limit (1024) in 'ntfs_read_folio' [-Wframe-larger-than]
> > static int ntfs_read_folio(struct file *file, struct folio *folio)
> > ^
> > 1 warning generated.
>
> Am I getting this warning because I changed the name of the function?
> Or did I do something Bad?
I assume so. There have been other reports of high stack usage in this
function, which it seems Arnd narrowed down to 64K pages (or 256K pages
in this case):
https://lore.kernel.org/20210927141815.1711736-1-arnd(a)kernel.org/
https://lore.kernel.org/202103280658.kByZmw5Q-lkp(a)intel.com/
Cheers,
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-02 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-30 5:11 [willy-pagecache:for-next 60/69] fs/ntfs/aops.c:378:12: warning: stack frame size (2216) exceeds limit (1024) in 'ntfs_read_folio' kernel test robot
2022-04-30 21:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-04-30 21:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-05-02 18:00 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2022-05-02 18:00 ` Nathan Chancellor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YnAcLApzs6frds2n@dev-arch.thelio-3990X \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.