From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
revest@chromium.org, peterx@redhat.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com,
jglisse@redhat.com, david@redhat.com, broonie@kernel.org,
ryan.roberts@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: [merged mm-stable] selftests-mm-skip-soft-dirty-tests-on-arm64.patch removed from -mm tree
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 16:02:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230811230215.41B02C433C7@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4621 bytes --]
The quilt patch titled
Subject: selftests/mm: skip soft-dirty tests on arm64
has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was
selftests-mm-skip-soft-dirty-tests-on-arm64.patch
This patch was dropped because it was merged into the mm-stable branch
of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
------------------------------------------------------
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Subject: selftests/mm: skip soft-dirty tests on arm64
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 09:25:16 +0100
arm64 does not support the soft-dirty PTE bit. However, the `soft-dirty`
test suite is currently run unconditionally and therefore generates
spurious test failures on arm64. There are also some tests in
`madv_populate` which assume it is supported.
For `soft-dirty` lets disable the whole suite for arm64; it is no longer
built and run_vmtests.sh will skip it if its not present.
For `madv_populate`, we need a runtime mechanism so that the remaining
tests continue to be run. Unfortunately, the only way to determine if the
soft-dirty dirty bit is supported is to write to a page, then see if the
bit is set in /proc/self/pagemap. But the tests that we want to
conditionally execute are testing precicesly this. So if we introduced
this feature check, we could accedentally turn a real failure (on a system
that claims to support soft-dirty) into a skip. So instead, do the check
based on architecture; for arm64, we report that soft-dirty is not
supported.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230724082522.1202616-3-ryan.roberts@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>
Cc: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile | 5 ++-
tools/testing/selftests/mm/madv_populate.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++--
tools/testing/selftests/mm/run_vmtests.sh | 5 ++-
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/madv_populate.c~selftests-mm-skip-soft-dirty-tests-on-arm64
+++ a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/madv_populate.c
@@ -264,14 +264,35 @@ static void test_softdirty(void)
munmap(addr, SIZE);
}
+static int system_has_softdirty(void)
+{
+ /*
+ * There is no way to check if the kernel supports soft-dirty, other
+ * than by writing to a page and seeing if the bit was set. But the
+ * tests are intended to check that the bit gets set when it should, so
+ * doing that check would turn a potentially legitimate fail into a
+ * skip. Fortunately, we know for sure that arm64 does not support
+ * soft-dirty. So for now, let's just use the arch as a corse guide.
+ */
+#if defined(__aarch64__)
+ return 0;
+#else
+ return 1;
+#endif
+}
+
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
+ int nr_tests = 16;
int err;
pagesize = getpagesize();
+ if (system_has_softdirty())
+ nr_tests += 5;
+
ksft_print_header();
- ksft_set_plan(21);
+ ksft_set_plan(nr_tests);
sense_support();
test_prot_read();
@@ -279,7 +300,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
test_holes();
test_populate_read();
test_populate_write();
- test_softdirty();
+ if (system_has_softdirty())
+ test_softdirty();
err = ksft_get_fail_cnt();
if (err)
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile~selftests-mm-skip-soft-dirty-tests-on-arm64
+++ a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile
@@ -64,12 +64,15 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS += thuge-gen
TEST_GEN_PROGS += transhuge-stress
TEST_GEN_PROGS += uffd-stress
TEST_GEN_PROGS += uffd-unit-tests
-TEST_GEN_PROGS += soft-dirty
TEST_GEN_PROGS += split_huge_page_test
TEST_GEN_PROGS += ksm_tests
TEST_GEN_PROGS += ksm_functional_tests
TEST_GEN_PROGS += mdwe_test
+ifneq ($(ARCH),arm64)
+TEST_GEN_PROGS += soft-dirty
+endif
+
ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64)
CAN_BUILD_I386 := $(shell ./../x86/check_cc.sh "$(CC)" ../x86/trivial_32bit_program.c -m32)
CAN_BUILD_X86_64 := $(shell ./../x86/check_cc.sh "$(CC)" ../x86/trivial_64bit_program.c)
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/run_vmtests.sh~selftests-mm-skip-soft-dirty-tests-on-arm64
+++ a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/run_vmtests.sh
@@ -322,7 +322,10 @@ then
CATEGORY="pkey" run_test ./protection_keys_64
fi
-CATEGORY="soft_dirty" run_test ./soft-dirty
+if [ -x ./soft-dirty ]
+then
+ CATEGORY="soft_dirty" run_test ./soft-dirty
+fi
# COW tests
CATEGORY="cow" run_test ./cow
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from ryan.roberts@arm.com are
reply other threads:[~2023-08-11 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230811230215.41B02C433C7@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=revest@chromium.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.