On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 02:57:18PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 05:28:33PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 12:23:46AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > commit: 2c69e2057962b6bd76d72446453862eb59325b49 [9995/11651] fs: Convert block_read_full_page() to block_read_full_folio() > > > config: hexagon-randconfig-r041-20220513 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220515/202205150051.3RzuooAG-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) > > > compiler: clang version 15.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 38189438b69ca27b4c6ce707c52dbd217583d046) > > ... > > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > > > > > >> fs/buffer.c:2254:5: warning: stack frame size (2144) exceeds limit (1024) in 'block_read_full_folio' [-Wframe-larger-than] > > > int block_read_full_folio(struct folio *folio, get_block_t *get_block) > > > ^ > > > 1 warning generated. > > > > Now show the warnings that were removed. This patch renames the > > function, and I bet there was a similar warning before this patch. > > > > But basically, I don't care about stack usage on hexagon with clang. > > AIUI, it's a known bug. > > For what it's worth, it seems like this is just 256K pages being 256K > pages... MAX_BUF_PER_PAGE is PAGE_SIZE / 512 so *arr is 2048 bytes big > in this configuration. You'd see a similar warning with PowerPC but that > configuration is non-standard: Ahh! Yes, I'd forgotten that Hexagon has that crazy config option. I think I can get rid of that enormous array of pointers, it just wasn't a high priority for me. > fs/buffer.c: In function ‘block_read_full_page’: > fs/buffer.c:2337:1: warning: the frame size of 2064 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=] > 2337 | } > | ^ > > It would be nice if the Intel folks could look at recognizing a function > rename so that you are not bothered by reports like this. > > As a side note... Brian, is there any reason for 256K pages to exist for > Hexagon? This has been an option since Hexagon's introduction but is it > actually used? 4K pages is the default and the help text says "use with > caution". Perhaps the choice should be turned off altogether for > CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST so that we cannot select this configuration and > bother developers with these reports. > > Cheers, > Nathan
