Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg

From: kernel test robot
Date: Wed Nov 01 2023 - 11:45:23 EST

Next message: Dave Kleikamp: "Re: [PATCH] jfs: fix array-index-out-of-bounds in dbAdjTree"
Previous message: Paz Zcharya: "Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/display: Only fail fastset on PSR2"
In reply to: Dmitry Rokosov: "[PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg"
Next in thread: Dmitry Rokosov: "Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi Dmitry,

kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:

[auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-everything]

url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Dmitry-Rokosov/mm-memcg-print-out-cgroup-name-in-the-memcg-tracepoints/20231101-183040
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov%40salutedevices.com
patch subject: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg
config: um-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config)
compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce)

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/

All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):

In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19:
In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9:
In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24:
include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr));
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu'
#define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x))
^
In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19:
In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9:
In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24:
include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr));
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu'
#define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x))
^
In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19:
In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9:
In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24:
include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
__raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
__raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
__raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:692:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
readsb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:700:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
readsw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:708:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
readsl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:717:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
writesb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:726:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
writesw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:735:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
writesl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count);
~~~~~~~~~~ ^
>> mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg,
^
mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active'?
include/trace/events/vmscan.h:467:1: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active' declared here
TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active,
^
include/linux/tracepoint.h:566:2: note: expanded from macro 'TRACE_EVENT'
DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args))
^
include/linux/tracepoint.h:432:2: note: expanded from macro 'DECLARE_TRACE'
__DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args), \
^
include/linux/tracepoint.h:355:21: note: expanded from macro '__DECLARE_TRACE'
static inline void trace_##name(proto) \
^
<scratch space>:33:1: note: expanded from here
trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active
^
>> mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg,
^
mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin'?
mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' declared here
trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg,
^
12 warnings and 2 errors generated.

vim +/trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin +5811 mm/vmscan.c

5791
5792 static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
5793 {
5794 struct mem_cgroup *target_memcg = sc->target_mem_cgroup;
5795 struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
5796
5797 memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, NULL, NULL);
5798 do {
5799 struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat);
5800 unsigned long reclaimed;
5801 unsigned long scanned;
5802
5803 /*
5804 * This loop can become CPU-bound when target memcgs
5805 * aren't eligible for reclaim - either because they
5806 * don't have any reclaimable pages, or because their
5807 * memory is explicitly protected. Avoid soft lockups.
5808 */
5809 cond_resched();
5810
> 5811 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg,
5812 sc->order,
5813 sc->gfp_mask);
5814
5815 mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(target_memcg, memcg);
5816
5817 if (mem_cgroup_below_min(target_memcg, memcg)) {
5818 /*
5819 * Hard protection.
5820 * If there is no reclaimable memory, OOM.
5821 */
5822 continue;
5823 } else if (mem_cgroup_below_low(target_memcg, memcg)) {
5824 /*
5825 * Soft protection.
5826 * Respect the protection only as long as
5827 * there is an unprotected supply
5828 * of reclaimable memory from other cgroups.
5829 */
5830 if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) {
5831 sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1;
5832 continue;
5833 }
5834 memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW);
5835 }
5836
5837 reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed;
5838 scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
5839
5840 shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc);
5841
5842 shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, memcg,
5843 sc->priority);
5844
> 5845 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg,
5846 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed);
5847
5848 /* Record the group's reclaim efficiency */
5849 if (!sc->proactive)
5850 vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false,
5851 sc->nr_scanned - scanned,
5852 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed);
5853
5854 } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL)));
5855 }
5856

--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

Next message: Dave Kleikamp: "Re: [PATCH] jfs: fix array-index-out-of-bounds in dbAdjTree"
Previous message: Paz Zcharya: "Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/display: Only fail fastset on PSR2"
In reply to: Dmitry Rokosov: "[PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg"
Next in thread: Dmitry Rokosov: "Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]