Re: [PATCH v2] workingset: ensure memcg is valid for recency check
From: kernel test robot
Date: Thu Aug 17 2023 - 23:27:50 EST
Hi Nhat,
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v6.5-rc6 next-20230817]
[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/Nhat-Pham/workingset-ensure-memcg-is-valid-for-recency-check/20230818-030311
base: linus/master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230817190126.3155299-1-nphamcs%40gmail.com
patch subject: [PATCH v2] workingset: ensure memcg is valid for recency check
config: loongarch-allnoconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230818/202308181116.FsJVPmJZ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config)
compiler: loongarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 12.3.0
reproduce: (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20230818/202308181116.FsJVPmJZ-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/202308181116.FsJVPmJZ-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
mm/workingset.c: In function 'unpack_shadow':
>> mm/workingset.c:245:22: error: implicit declaration of function 'css_tryget'; did you mean 'wb_tryget'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
245 | if (memcg && css_tryget(&memcg->css))
| ^~~~~~~~~~
| wb_tryget
mm/workingset.c:245:39: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct mem_cgroup'
245 | if (memcg && css_tryget(&memcg->css))
| ^~
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +245 mm/workingset.c
208
209 /*
210 * Unpacks the stored fields of a shadow entry into the given pointers.
211 *
212 * The memcg pointer is only populated if the memcg recorded in the shadow
213 * entry is valid. In this case, a reference to the memcg will be acquired,
214 * and a corresponding mem_cgroup_put() will be needed when we no longer
215 * need the memcg.
216 */
217 static void unpack_shadow(void *shadow, struct mem_cgroup **memcgp,
218 pg_data_t **pgdat, unsigned long *evictionp, bool *workingsetp)
219 {
220 unsigned long entry = xa_to_value(shadow);
221 struct mem_cgroup *memcg;
222 int memcgid, nid;
223 bool workingset;
224
225 workingset = entry & ((1UL << WORKINGSET_SHIFT) - 1);
226 entry >>= WORKINGSET_SHIFT;
227 nid = entry & ((1UL << NODES_SHIFT) - 1);
228 entry >>= NODES_SHIFT;
229 memcgid = entry & ((1UL << MEM_CGROUP_ID_SHIFT) - 1);
230 entry >>= MEM_CGROUP_ID_SHIFT;
231
232 /*
233 * Look up the memcg associated with the stored ID. It might
234 * have been deleted since the folio's eviction.
235 *
236 * Note that in rare events the ID could have been recycled
237 * for a new cgroup that refaults a shared folio. This is
238 * impossible to tell from the available data. However, this
239 * should be a rare and limited disturbance, and activations
240 * are always speculative anyway. Ultimately, it's the aging
241 * algorithm's job to shake out the minimum access frequency
242 * for the active cache.
243 */
244 memcg = mem_cgroup_from_id(memcgid);
> 245 if (memcg && css_tryget(&memcg->css))
246 *memcgp = memcg;
247 else
248 *memcgp = NULL;
249
250 *pgdat = NODE_DATA(nid);
251 *evictionp = entry;
252 *workingsetp = workingset;
253 }
254
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki