+csky maintainer On 6/27/25 8:41 AM, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi Paolo, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > [auto build test WARNING on net-next/main] > > url: > https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Paolo-Abeni/scripts-kernel_doc-py-properly-handle-VIRTIO_DECLARE_FEATURES/20250624-221751 > base: net-next/main > patch link: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/23e46bff5333015d92bf0876033750d9fbf555a0.1750753211.git.pabeni%40redhat.com > patch subject: [PATCH v6 net-next 4/9] vhost-net: allow configuring extended > features > config: csky-randconfig-001-20250627 > (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250627/202506271443.g9cax8ps-...@intel.com/config) > compiler: csky-linux-gcc (GCC) 15.1.0 > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): > (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250627/202506271443.g9cax8ps-...@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 <l...@intel.com> > | Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202506271443.g9cax8ps-...@intel.com/ > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > In file included from include/linux/uaccess.h:12, > from include/linux/sched/task.h:13, > from include/linux/sched/signal.h:9, > from include/linux/rcuwait.h:6, > from include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:7, > from include/linux/fs.h:34, > from include/linux/compat.h:17, > from drivers/vhost/net.c:8: > arch/csky/include/asm/uaccess.h: In function '__get_user_fn.constprop': >>> arch/csky/include/asm/uaccess.h:147:9: warning: 'retval' is used >>> uninitialized [-Wuninitialized] > 147 | __asm__ __volatile__( \ > | ^~~~~~~ > arch/csky/include/asm/uaccess.h:187:17: note: in expansion of macro > '__get_user_asm_64' > 187 | __get_user_asm_64(x, ptr, retval); > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > arch/csky/include/asm/uaccess.h:170:13: note: 'retval' was declared here > 170 | int retval; > | ^~~~~~ > > > vim +/retval +147 arch/csky/include/asm/uaccess.h > > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 141 > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 142 #define __get_user_asm_64(x, ptr, > err) \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 143 do { > \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 144 int tmp; > \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 145 int errcode; > \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 146 > \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 @147 __asm__ __volatile__( > \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 148 "1: ldw %3, (%2, 0) > \n" \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 149 " stw %3, (%1, 0) > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 150 "2: ldw %3, (%2, 4) > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 151 " stw %3, (%1, 4) > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 152 " br 4f > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 153 "3: mov %0, %4 > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 154 " br 4f > \n" \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 155 ".section __ex_table, \"a\" > \n" \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 156 ".align 2 > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 157 ".long 1b, 3b > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 158 ".long 2b, 3b > \n" \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 159 ".previous > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 160 "4: > \n" \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 161 : "=r"(err), "=r"(x), > "=r"(ptr), \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 162 "=r"(tmp), "=r"(errcode) > \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 163 : "0"(err), "1"(x), "2"(ptr), > "3"(0), \ > e58a41c2226847f Guo Ren 2021-04-21 164 "4"(-EFAULT) > \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 165 : "memory"); > \ > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 166 } while (0) > da551281947cb2c Guo Ren 2018-09-05 167
The intel test report reported the above compile warning on this series: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20250627084609-mutt-send-email-...@kernel.org/T/#md788de2b3a4e9da23ac93b5f1c773a6070b5b4fb specifically, in patch 4: + if (get_user(features, featurep + 1 + i)) + return -EFAULT; AFAICS such statement is legit, and the bot points to some problem in the arch specific get_user() implementation. Could you please have a look? Thanks, Paolo
