From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [refcount] d2d337b185: WARNING:at_lib/refcount.c:#refcount_warn_saturate
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 08:09:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191203080932.GA6481@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92d23f27-5ed0-5765-a9e3-9bc9fbd3768d@intel.com>
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:01:46PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote:
> On 12/2/19 5:43 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 16:49, kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> > > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
> > >
> > > commit: d2d337b185bd2abff262f3cf7de0080b3888e41c ("[RESEND PATCH v4
> > > 08/10] refcount: Consolidate implementations of refcount_t")
> > > url:
> > > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Will-Deacon/Rework-REFCOUNT_FULL-using-atomic_fetch_-operations/20191124-052413
> > >
> > >
> > > in testcase: ocfs2test
> > > with following parameters:
> > >
> > > disk: 1SSD
> > > test: test-mkfs
> > >
> > So we went from a success rate of 0 out of 24 to 0 out of 24 by
> > applying that patch. How on earth is that a result that justifies
> > spamming everybody?
>
> These failures were triggered by ocfs2test test, and all tests were failed
> include parent commit "2ab80bd4ae".
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191119182745.GA11397@willie-the-truck
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190912105640.2l6mtdjmcyyhmyun@willie-the-truck/
The refcount code is doing its job afaict and its the ocfs2 code at fault.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [refcount] d2d337b185: WARNING:at_lib/refcount.c:#refcount_warn_saturate
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 08:09:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191203080932.GA6481@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92d23f27-5ed0-5765-a9e3-9bc9fbd3768d@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1224 bytes --]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 04:01:46PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote:
> On 12/2/19 5:43 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 16:49, kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> > > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
> > >
> > > commit: d2d337b185bd2abff262f3cf7de0080b3888e41c ("[RESEND PATCH v4
> > > 08/10] refcount: Consolidate implementations of refcount_t")
> > > url:
> > > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Will-Deacon/Rework-REFCOUNT_FULL-using-atomic_fetch_-operations/20191124-052413
> > >
> > >
> > > in testcase: ocfs2test
> > > with following parameters:
> > >
> > > disk: 1SSD
> > > test: test-mkfs
> > >
> > So we went from a success rate of 0 out of 24 to 0 out of 24 by
> > applying that patch. How on earth is that a result that justifies
> > spamming everybody?
>
> These failures were triggered by ocfs2test test, and all tests were failed
> include parent commit "2ab80bd4ae".
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191119182745.GA11397(a)willie-the-truck
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190912105640.2l6mtdjmcyyhmyun(a)willie-the-truck/
The refcount code is doing its job afaict and its the ocfs2 code at fault.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-03 8:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-21 11:58 [RESEND PATCH v4 00/10] Rework REFCOUNT_FULL using atomic_fetch_* operations Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 01/10] lib/refcount: Define constants for saturation and max refcount values Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 02/10] lib/refcount: Ensure integer operands are treated as signed Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 03/10] lib/refcount: Remove unused refcount_*_checked() variants Will Deacon
2019-11-21 14:55 ` David Sterba
2019-11-21 17:11 ` Kees Cook
2019-11-21 17:17 ` David Sterba
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 04/10] lib/refcount: Move bulk of REFCOUNT_FULL implementation into header Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: Move the bulk of the REFCOUNT_FULL implementation into the <linux/refcount.h> header tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 05/10] lib/refcount: Improve performance of generic REFCOUNT_FULL code Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2020-02-26 4:10 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 05/10] lib/refcount: " Jann Horn
2020-02-26 4:10 ` Jann Horn
2020-02-28 10:43 ` Will Deacon
2020-03-02 13:06 ` Jann Horn
2020-03-02 13:06 ` Jann Horn
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 06/10] lib/refcount: Move saturation warnings out of line Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:58 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 07/10] lib/refcount: Consolidate REFCOUNT_{MAX,SATURATED} definitions Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:59 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 08/10] refcount: Consolidate implementations of refcount_t Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-12-01 15:49 ` [refcount] d2d337b185: WARNING:at_lib/refcount.c:#refcount_warn_saturate kernel test robot
2019-12-01 15:49 ` kernel test robot
2019-12-02 9:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-12-02 9:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-12-03 8:01 ` [LKP] " Rong Chen
2019-12-03 8:01 ` Rong Chen
2019-12-03 8:09 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2019-12-03 8:09 ` Will Deacon
2019-12-03 8:42 ` [LKP] " Rong Chen
2019-12-03 8:42 ` Rong Chen
2019-11-21 11:59 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 09/10] lib/refcount: Remove unused 'refcount_error_report()' function Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/refcount: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 11:59 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 10/10] drivers/lkdtm: Remove references to CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL Will Deacon
2019-11-25 8:19 ` [tip: locking/core] lkdtm: " tip-bot2 for Will Deacon
2019-11-21 12:07 ` [RESEND PATCH v4 00/10] Rework REFCOUNT_FULL using atomic_fetch_* operations Ard Biesheuvel
2019-11-22 3:44 ` Hanjun Guo
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=20191203080932.GA6481@willie-the-truck \
--to=will@kernel.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=elena.reshetova@intel.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \
/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.