On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 09:07:32PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> > Following warnings and errors have been noticed while building i386 build
> > on stable-rc linux.4.19.y and linux.4.14.y.
> >
> > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Build log:
> > ==========
> > kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_dead_cpu':
> > kernel/profile.c:346:27: warning: the comparison will always evaluate
> > as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL
> > [-Waddress]
> > 346 | if (prof_cpu_mask != NULL)
> > | ^~
> > kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
> > 49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_online_cpu':
> > kernel/profile.c:383:27: warning: the comparison will always evaluate
> > as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL
> > [-Waddress]
> > 383 | if (prof_cpu_mask != NULL)
> > | ^~
> > kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
> > 49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kernel/profile.c: In function 'profile_tick':
> > kernel/profile.c:413:47: warning: the comparison will always evaluate
> > as 'true' for the address of 'prof_cpu_mask' will never be NULL
> > [-Waddress]
> > 413 | if (!user_mode(regs) && prof_cpu_mask != NULL &&
> > | ^~
> > kernel/profile.c:49:22: note: 'prof_cpu_mask' declared here
> > 49 | static cpumask_var_t prof_cpu_mask;
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Those are not due to this set of patches, right?
>
> > arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S: Assembler messages:
> > arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S:126: Error: invalid character '(' in mnemonic
> > arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S:57: Info: macro invoked from here
> > arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S:128: Error: invalid character '(' in mnemonic
> > arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S:57: Info: macro invoked from here
>
> This is odd, nothing touches this file either.
>
> 7e09ac27f43b ("x86: Fix .brk attribute in linker script") is backported
> here, perhaps that is the issue? If you revert that, does the error go
> away?
Nope, that's not the issue.
> Let me see if I can build a 32 bit kernel anymore...
I can do this now, let me figure it out...
thanks,
greg k-h
