* Re: [PATCH 09/12] tracing: branch: Use trace_tracing_is_on_cpu() instead of "disabled" field
[not found] <20250502205349.299144667@goodmis.org>
@ 2025-05-03 10:10 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-05 12:11 ` kernel test robot
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2025-05-03 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Rostedt, linux-kernel, linux-trace-kernel
Cc: oe-kbuild-all, Masami Hiramatsu, Mark Rutland, Mathieu Desnoyers,
Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List
Hi Steven,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on trace/for-next]
[also build test ERROR on linus/master v6.15-rc4 next-20250502]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Steven-Rostedt/tracing-mmiotrace-Remove-reference-to-unused-per-CPU-data-pointer/20250503-050317
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace for-next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250502205349.299144667%40goodmis.org
patch subject: [PATCH 09/12] tracing: branch: Use trace_tracing_is_on_cpu() instead of "disabled" field
config: arc-randconfig-001-20250503 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250503/202505031738.buFg2SBt-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: arc-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250503/202505031738.buFg2SBt-lkp@intel.com/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@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202505031738.buFg2SBt-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c: In function 'probe_likely_condition':
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:56:43: error: implicit declaration of function 'raw_smp_process_id'; did you mean 'raw_smp_processor_id'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
56 | if (!tracer_tracing_is_on_cpu(tr, raw_smp_process_id()))
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| raw_smp_processor_id
vim +56 kernel/trace/trace_branch.c
29
30 static void
31 probe_likely_condition(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val, int expect)
32 {
33 struct trace_array *tr = branch_tracer;
34 struct trace_buffer *buffer;
35 struct ring_buffer_event *event;
36 struct trace_branch *entry;
37 unsigned long flags;
38 unsigned int trace_ctx;
39 const char *p;
40
41 if (current->trace_recursion & TRACE_BRANCH_BIT)
42 return;
43
44 /*
45 * I would love to save just the ftrace_likely_data pointer, but
46 * this code can also be used by modules. Ugly things can happen
47 * if the module is unloaded, and then we go and read the
48 * pointer. This is slower, but much safer.
49 */
50
51 if (unlikely(!tr))
52 return;
53
54 raw_local_irq_save(flags);
55 current->trace_recursion |= TRACE_BRANCH_BIT;
> 56 if (!tracer_tracing_is_on_cpu(tr, raw_smp_process_id()))
57 goto out;
58
59 trace_ctx = tracing_gen_ctx_flags(flags);
60 buffer = tr->array_buffer.buffer;
61 event = trace_buffer_lock_reserve(buffer, TRACE_BRANCH,
62 sizeof(*entry), trace_ctx);
63 if (!event)
64 goto out;
65
66 entry = ring_buffer_event_data(event);
67
68 /* Strip off the path, only save the file */
69 p = f->data.file + strlen(f->data.file);
70 while (p >= f->data.file && *p != '/')
71 p--;
72 p++;
73
74 strscpy(entry->func, f->data.func);
75 strscpy(entry->file, p);
76 entry->constant = f->constant;
77 entry->line = f->data.line;
78 entry->correct = val == expect;
79
80 trace_buffer_unlock_commit_nostack(buffer, event);
81
82 out:
83 current->trace_recursion &= ~TRACE_BRANCH_BIT;
84 raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
85 }
86
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 09/12] tracing: branch: Use trace_tracing_is_on_cpu() instead of "disabled" field
[not found] <20250502205349.299144667@goodmis.org>
2025-05-03 10:10 ` [PATCH 09/12] tracing: branch: Use trace_tracing_is_on_cpu() instead of "disabled" field kernel test robot
@ 2025-05-05 12:11 ` kernel test robot
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2025-05-05 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Rostedt, linux-kernel, linux-trace-kernel
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, Masami Hiramatsu, Mark Rutland,
Mathieu Desnoyers, Andrew Morton, Linux Memory Management List
Hi Steven,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on trace/for-next]
[also build test ERROR on linus/master v6.15-rc5 next-20250502]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Steven-Rostedt/tracing-mmiotrace-Remove-reference-to-unused-per-CPU-data-pointer/20250503-050317
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/trace/linux-trace for-next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250502205349.299144667%40goodmis.org
patch subject: [PATCH 09/12] tracing: branch: Use trace_tracing_is_on_cpu() instead of "disabled" field
config: i386-buildonly-randconfig-002-20250505 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250505/202505051827.xKU53TzL-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 20.1.2 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 58df0ef89dd64126512e4ee27b4ac3fd8ddf6247)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250505/202505051827.xKU53TzL-lkp@intel.com/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@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202505051827.xKU53TzL-lkp@intel.com/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:56:36: error: call to undeclared function 'raw_smp_process_id'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
56 | if (!tracer_tracing_is_on_cpu(tr, raw_smp_process_id()))
| ^
kernel/trace/trace_branch.c:56:36: note: did you mean 'safe_smp_processor_id'?
arch/x86/include/asm/smp.h:140:12: note: 'safe_smp_processor_id' declared here
140 | extern int safe_smp_processor_id(void);
| ^
1 error generated.
vim +/raw_smp_process_id +56 kernel/trace/trace_branch.c
29
30 static void
31 probe_likely_condition(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val, int expect)
32 {
33 struct trace_array *tr = branch_tracer;
34 struct trace_buffer *buffer;
35 struct ring_buffer_event *event;
36 struct trace_branch *entry;
37 unsigned long flags;
38 unsigned int trace_ctx;
39 const char *p;
40
41 if (current->trace_recursion & TRACE_BRANCH_BIT)
42 return;
43
44 /*
45 * I would love to save just the ftrace_likely_data pointer, but
46 * this code can also be used by modules. Ugly things can happen
47 * if the module is unloaded, and then we go and read the
48 * pointer. This is slower, but much safer.
49 */
50
51 if (unlikely(!tr))
52 return;
53
54 raw_local_irq_save(flags);
55 current->trace_recursion |= TRACE_BRANCH_BIT;
> 56 if (!tracer_tracing_is_on_cpu(tr, raw_smp_process_id()))
57 goto out;
58
59 trace_ctx = tracing_gen_ctx_flags(flags);
60 buffer = tr->array_buffer.buffer;
61 event = trace_buffer_lock_reserve(buffer, TRACE_BRANCH,
62 sizeof(*entry), trace_ctx);
63 if (!event)
64 goto out;
65
66 entry = ring_buffer_event_data(event);
67
68 /* Strip off the path, only save the file */
69 p = f->data.file + strlen(f->data.file);
70 while (p >= f->data.file && *p != '/')
71 p--;
72 p++;
73
74 strscpy(entry->func, f->data.func);
75 strscpy(entry->file, p);
76 entry->constant = f->constant;
77 entry->line = f->data.line;
78 entry->correct = val == expect;
79
80 trace_buffer_unlock_commit_nostack(buffer, event);
81
82 out:
83 current->trace_recursion &= ~TRACE_BRANCH_BIT;
84 raw_local_irq_restore(flags);
85 }
86
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread