Re: pull-request: wireless-drivers-next-2021-12-07
flat view
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-12-08 16:21:16
Also in:
linux-wireless
Jakub Kicinski [off-list ref] writes:
On Wed, 08 Dec 2021 10:00:15 +0200 Kalle Valo wrote:quoted
Jakub Kicinski [off-list ref] writes:quoted
On Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:42:11 +0000 (UTC) Kalle Valo wrote:quoted
here's a pull request to net-next tree, more info below. Please let me know if there are any problems.Pulled, thanks! Could you chase the appropriate people so that the new W=1 C=1 warnings get resolved before the merge window's here? https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20211207144211.A9949C341C1@smtp.kernel.org/Just so that I understand right, you are referring to this patchwork test: Errors and warnings before: 111 this patch: 115 https://patchwork.hopto.org/static/nipa/591659/12662005/build_32bit/ And you want the four new warnings to be fixed? That can be quite time consuming, to be honest I would rather revert the commits than using a lot of my time trying to get people fix the warnings. Is there an easy way to find what are the new warnings?Yeah, scroll down, there is a diff of the old warnings vs new ones, and a summary of which files have changed their warning count: + 2 ../drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c + 3 ../drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mei/main.c - 1 ../drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c + 2 ../drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c - 2 ../drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/wlan.c
Ah, that makes it easier.
So presumably these are the warnings that were added: drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mei/main.c:193: warning: cannot understand function prototype: 'struct ' drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mei/main.c:1784: warning: Function parameter or member 'cldev' not described in 'iwl_mei_probe' drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mei/main.c:1784: warning: Function parameter or member 'id' not described in 'iwl_mei_probe'
Luca, please take a look and send a patch. I'll then apply it directly to wireless-drivers-next.
drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3911:28: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3911:28: expected restricted __le32 [assigned] [usertype] period_msec drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3911:28: got restricted __le16 [usertype] drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3913:30: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3913:30: expected unsigned char [assigned] [usertype] keep_alive_id drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/cfg80211.c:3913:30: got restricted __le16 [usertype]
Loic, your patch should fix these, right? https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/1638953708-29192-1-git-send-email-loic.poulain@linaro.org/
drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ops.c:684:12: warning: context imbalance in 'iwl_mvm_start_get_nvm' - wrong count at exit
Luca, please also take a look at this.
quoted
But in the big picture are you saying the net trees now have a rule that no new W=1 and C=1 warnings are allowed? I do test ath10k and ath11k drivers for W=1 and C=1 warnings, but all other drivers are on their own in this regard. At the moment I have no tooling in place to check all wireless drivers.For the code we merge directly we try to make sure there are no new warnings. I realize it's quite a bit of work for larger trees unless you have the infra so not a hard requirement (for you).
Yeah, at the moment I really would not be able to catch W=1 or sparse warnings :/ And fixing them afterwards is just too slow. But if we would be able to fix all the warnings in drivers/net/wireless then it would be easy for me to enable W=1 and C=1 in my own build tests.
FWIW the build bot we wrote is available on GH: https://github.com/kuba-moo/nipa But it currently hard codes tree matching logic for bpf and netdev, so would probably take a few hours to adopt it.
Thanks, it would good to have a similar system for wireless trees. Anyone want to help? :) -- https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches