Re: [PATCH v2] Fix linux-starfive build under sid

["'Jan Kiszka' via isar-users" <isar-users@googlegroups.com>]

On 04.10.24 12:37, Uladzimir Bely wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-10-04 at 12:27 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 04.10.24 12:22, 'Jan Kiszka' via isar-users wrote:
>>> On 04.10.24 11:43, Uladzimir Bely wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2024-10-04 at 10:38 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>> On 04.10.24 10:17, Uladzimir Bely wrote:
>>>>>> The patch is taken from the linux kernel upstream >= 6.8.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Uladzimir Bely <ubely@ilbers.de>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  ...oc-arguments-order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch | 43
>>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  .../linux/linux-starfive_6.6-visionfive2.bb   |  1 +
>>>>>>  2 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
>>>>>>  create mode 100644 meta-isar/recipes-
>>>>>> kernel/linux/files/0001-
>>>>>> btrfs-fix-kvcalloc-arguments-order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changes since v1 (Fix linux build under sid and trixie):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Since we don't build linux-mainline/linux-phy kernels for
>>>>>> trixie/sid
>>>>>> apply kernel patch only for linux-starfive_6.6-visionfive2
>>>>>> target.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I additionally checked [1] for existing branches and can
>>>>>> conclude:
>>>>>>  - recent 6.6-based branch "JH7110_VisionFive2_upstream" is
>>>>>> still
>>>>>> affected and requires the patch
>>>>>>  - recent "starfive-tech/visionfive" is 6.10-based already
>>>>>> includes
>>>>>> the fix, but using it leads to different build errors. Also,
>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> sure if it properly supports "VisionFive2" board.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, for now, the simplest way to fix build error we have in
>>>>>> CI is
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> just apply upstream patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/files/0001-btrfs-
>>>>>> fix-
>>>>>> kvcalloc-arguments-order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch b/meta-
>>>>>> isar/recipes-kernel/linux/files/0001-btrfs-fix-kvcalloc-
>>>>>> arguments-
>>>>>> order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch
>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>> index 00000000..afe09eab
>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>> +++ b/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/files/0001-btrfs-fix-
>>>>>> kvcalloc-
>>>>>> arguments-order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
>>>>>> +From 6ff09b6b8c2fb6b3edda4ffaa173153a40653067 Mon Sep 17
>>>>>> 00:00:00
>>>>>> 2001
>>>>>> +From: Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru>
>>>>>> +Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 11:47:45 +0300
>>>>>> +Subject: [PATCH] btrfs: fix kvcalloc() arguments order in
>>>>>> btrfs_ioctl_send()
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +When compiling with gcc version 14.0.0 20231220
>>>>>> (experimental)
>>>>>> +and W=1, I've noticed the following warning:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +fs/btrfs/send.c: In function 'btrfs_ioctl_send':
>>>>>> +fs/btrfs/send.c:8208:44: warning: 'kvcalloc' sizes specified
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> 'sizeof'
>>>>>> +in the earlier argument and not in the later argument [-
>>>>>> Wcalloc-
>>>>>> transposed-args]
>>>>>> + 8208 |         sctx->clone_roots = kvcalloc(sizeof(*sctx-
>>>>>>> clone_roots),
>>>>>> +      |                                            ^
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Since 'n' and 'size' arguments of 'kvcalloc()' are
>>>>>> multiplied to
>>>>>> +calculate the final size, their actual order doesn't affect
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> result
>>>>>> +and so this is not a bug. But it's still worth to fix it.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Signed-off-by: Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru>
>>>>>> +Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
>>>>>> +Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
>>>>>> +---
>>>>>> + fs/btrfs/send.c | 4 ++--
>>>>>> + 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +diff --git a/fs/btrfs/send.c b/fs/btrfs/send.c
>>>>>> +index 4e36550618e5..2d7519a6ce72 100644
>>>>>> +--- a/fs/btrfs/send.c
>>>>>> ++++ b/fs/btrfs/send.c
>>>>>> +@@ -8205,8 +8205,8 @@ long btrfs_ioctl_send(struct inode
>>>>>> *inode,
>>>>>> struct btrfs_ioctl_send_args *arg)
>>>>>> + 		goto out;
>>>>>> + 	}
>>>>>> + 
>>>>>> +-	sctx->clone_roots = kvcalloc(sizeof(*sctx-
>>>>>>> clone_roots),
>>>>>> +-				     arg-
>>>>>>> clone_sources_count + 1,
>>>>>> ++	sctx->clone_roots = kvcalloc(arg-
>>>>>>> clone_sources_count + 1,
>>>>>> ++				     sizeof(*sctx-
>>>>>>> clone_roots),
>>>>>> + 				     GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> + 	if (!sctx->clone_roots) {
>>>>>> + 		ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> +-- 
>>>>>> +2.45.2
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> diff --git a/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-
>>>>>> starfive_6.6-
>>>>>> visionfive2.bb b/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-
>>>>>> starfive_6.6-
>>>>>> visionfive2.bb
>>>>>> index f4dd5c9a..a267241f 100644
>>>>>> --- a/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-starfive_6.6-
>>>>>> visionfive2.bb
>>>>>> +++ b/meta-isar/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-starfive_6.6-
>>>>>> visionfive2.bb
>>>>>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ require recipes-kernel/linux/linux-custom.inc
>>>>>>  SRC_URI += " \
>>>>>>     
>>>>>> https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/archive/${SRCREV}.tar.gz;downloadfilename=linux-starfive-${SRCREV}.tar.gz
>>>>>>  \
>>>>>>     
>>>>>> file://0001-riscv-efistub-Ensure-GP-relative-addressing-is-not-u.patch
>>>>>>  \
>>>>>> +   
>>>>>> file://0001-btrfs-fix-kvcalloc-arguments-order-in-btrfs_ioctl_se.patch
>>>>>>  \
>>>>>>      file://starfive2_extra.cfg"
>>>>>>  SRCREV = "9fe004eaf1aa5b23bd5d03b4cfe9c3858bd884c4"
>>>>>>  SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
>>>>>> "9eaf7659aa57e2c5b399b7b33076f1376ec43ef343680e0a57e0a2a9bef6
>>>>>> c0ae"
>>>>>
>>>>> NACK, update the kernel. I think I already told you. May even
>>>>> obsolete
>>>>> the other patch.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I tried this (see the text above the diff starts). Updated
>>>> 6.6-
>>>> based branch still requires both patches.
>>>>
>>>
>>> https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/commits/starfive-6.6.31-dubhe
>>>
>>> As I told you.
>>>
>>> I'm sending the proper patch in a minute.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, seems that's the wrong tree, and
>> JH7110_VisionFive2_6.6.y_devel
>> was not updated properly.
>>
>> But there is no way to build against sid except for using an older
>> snapshot. How did you test this?
>>
>> Jan
>>
> 
> I tested few branches:
> - JH7110_VisionFive2_upstream - this seems to be a proper tree (at
> least, it includes starfive_visionfive2_defconfig, and appropriate
> devicetree files look complete). But this still has now a fix and
> requires both patches

Yes, it is. I've created
https://github.com/starfive-tech/linux/issues/140 to resolve the problem
"upstream" eventually.

> - starfive-tech/visionfive - this is based on linux-6.10, includes
> both patches. But there are different build errors here and no
> starfive_visionfive2_defconfig present. Also, board devicetree files
> has less stuff.

That's version 1 of the VisionFive, a different board.

> - starfive-6.6.31-dubhe - this includes the patch (but not the other
> one). But there is also no proper defconfig and board deficetrees are
> not looking full enough.

Even a different SoC that may lack patches we need. I was misled.

> 
> Some tests were done in one of our CI instances where we already have
> an updated version of debootstrap installed. Manual check of the build
> can be also done under kas-container shell, but some additional steps
> (e.g., adding bookworm-backports to source list and installing
> "debootstrap/bookworm-backports") are required before running bitbake.
> 

You must be natively building - I don't have that much time. Crossbuild
is borken once again, but the snapshot we also use in isar-cip-core is
fine (but not affected by the compiler update), see my kas menu patch.

Anyway, ACK for this patch until upstream updated their branch.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Technology
Linux Expert Center

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "isar-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to isar-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/isar-users/8e2696ba-1311-4e0c-89dc-8c29e84ac0c6%40siemens.com.