Hi Daniel, kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: [auto build test WARNING on akpm-mm/mm-everything] [also build test WARNING on xfs-linux/for-next brauner-vfs/vfs.all linus/master v6.9 next-20240515] [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/Daniel-Gomez/splice-don-t-check-for-uptodate-if-partially-uptodate-is-impl/20240515-135925 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240515055719.32577-13-da.gomez%40samsung.com patch subject: [PATCH 12/12] shmem: add large folio support to the write and fallocate paths config: openrisc-defconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240516/202405160245.2EBqOCyg-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) compiler: or1k-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240516/202405160245.2EBqOCyg-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/202405160245.2EBqOCyg-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> mm/shmem.c:1864: warning: Function parameter or struct member 'sbinfo' not described in 'shmem_mapping_size_order' mm/shmem.c:2427: warning: Function parameter or struct member 'len' not described in 'shmem_get_folio' vim +1864 mm/shmem.c 1845 1846 /** 1847 * shmem_mapping_size_order - Get maximum folio order for the given file size. 1848 * @mapping: Target address_space. 1849 * @index: The page index. 1850 * @size: The suggested size of the folio to create. 1851 * 1852 * This returns a high order for folios (when supported) based on the file size 1853 * which the mapping currently allows at the given index. The index is relevant 1854 * due to alignment considerations the mapping might have. The returned order 1855 * may be less than the size passed. 1856 * 1857 * Like __filemap_get_folio order calculation. 1858 * 1859 * Return: The order. 1860 */ 1861 static inline unsigned int 1862 shmem_mapping_size_order(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, 1863 size_t size, struct shmem_sb_info *sbinfo) > 1864 { 1865 unsigned int order = ilog2(size); 1866 1867 if ((order <= PAGE_SHIFT) || 1868 (!mapping_large_folio_support(mapping) || !sbinfo->noswap)) 1869 return 0; 1870 1871 order -= PAGE_SHIFT; 1872 1873 /* If we're not aligned, allocate a smaller folio */ 1874 if (index & ((1UL << order) - 1)) 1875 order = __ffs(index); 1876 1877 order = min_t(size_t, order, MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER); 1878 1879 /* Order-1 not supported due to THP dependency */ 1880 return (order == 1) ? 0 : order; 1881 } 1882 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
