Hi Johan, Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: [auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Johan-Almbladh/bpf-tests-Extend-JIT-test-suite-coverage/20210903-025430 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master config: riscv-randconfig-r001-20210903 (attached as .config) compiler: clang version 14.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project c9948e9254fbb6ea00f66c7b4542311d21e060be) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross # install riscv cross compiling tool for clang build # apt-get install binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/ceabc579a2dfd55d025c0e65dcdb4f8fd313990c git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux git fetch --no-tags linux-review Johan-Almbladh/bpf-tests-Extend-JIT-test-suite-coverage/20210903-025430 git checkout ceabc579a2dfd55d025c0e65dcdb4f8fd313990c # save the attached .config to linux build tree COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross ARCH=riscv If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate Reported-by: kernel test robot All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> lib/test_bpf.c:581:10: warning: unsequenced modification and access to 'i' [-Wunsequenced] insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, i); ^ ~ 1 warning generated. vim +/i +581 lib/test_bpf.c 507 508 /* Test an ALU shift operation for all valid shift values */ 509 static int __bpf_fill_alu_shift(struct bpf_test *self, u8 op, 510 u8 mode, bool alu32) 511 { 512 static const s64 regs[] = { 513 0x0123456789abcdefLL, /* dword > 0, word < 0 */ 514 0xfedcba9876543210LL, /* dowrd < 0, word > 0 */ 515 0xfedcba0198765432LL, /* dowrd < 0, word < 0 */ 516 0x0123458967abcdefLL, /* dword > 0, word > 0 */ 517 }; 518 int bits = alu32 ? 32 : 64; 519 int len = (2 + 8 * bits) * ARRAY_SIZE(regs) + 2; 520 struct bpf_insn *insn; 521 int imm, k; 522 int i = 0; 523 524 insn = kmalloc_array(len, sizeof(*insn), GFP_KERNEL); 525 if (!insn) 526 return -ENOMEM; 527 528 for (k = 0; k < ARRAY_SIZE(regs); k++) { 529 s64 reg = regs[k]; 530 531 i += __bpf_ld_imm64(&insn[i], R3, reg); 532 533 for (imm = 0; imm < bits; imm++) { 534 u64 val; 535 536 /* Perform operation */ 537 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, R1, R3); 538 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R2, imm); 539 if (alu32) { 540 if (mode == BPF_K) 541 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(op, R1, imm); 542 else 543 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_REG(op, R1, R2); 544 switch (op) { 545 case BPF_LSH: 546 val = (u32)reg << imm; 547 break; 548 case BPF_RSH: 549 val = (u32)reg >> imm; 550 break; 551 case BPF_ARSH: 552 val = (u32)reg >> imm; 553 if (imm > 0 && (reg & 0x80000000)) 554 val |= ~(u32)0 << (32 - imm); 555 break; 556 } 557 } else { 558 if (mode == BPF_K) 559 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(op, R1, imm); 560 else 561 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_REG(op, R1, R2); 562 switch (op) { 563 case BPF_LSH: 564 val = (u64)reg << imm; 565 break; 566 case BPF_RSH: 567 val = (u64)reg >> imm; 568 break; 569 case BPF_ARSH: 570 val = (u64)reg >> imm; 571 if (imm > 0 && reg < 0) 572 val |= ~(u64)0 << (64 - imm); 573 break; 574 } 575 } 576 577 /* Load reference */ 578 i += __bpf_ld_imm64(&insn[i], R4, val); 579 580 /* For diagnostic purposes */ > 581 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, i); 582 583 /* Check result */ 584 insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JEQ, R1, R4, 1); 585 insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN(); 586 } 587 } 588 589 insn[i++] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 1); 590 insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN(); 591 592 self->u.ptr.insns = insn; 593 self->u.ptr.len = len; 594 BUG_ON(i > len); 595 596 return 0; 597 } 598 --- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org