All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
To: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
	Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>,
	Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
Cc: kernel@collabora.com, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: iommu: add config needed for iommufd_fail_nth
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:49:58 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240327114958.GG8419@ziepe.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56cc8b9e-c1cf-4520-ba45-b1237e8b7b64@collabora.com>

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 03:14:25PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> On 3/26/24 8:03 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 06:09:34PM +0500, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> >> Even after applying this config patch and following snippet (which doesn't
> >> terminate the program if mmap doesn't allocate exactly as the hint), I'm
> >> finding failed tests.
> >>
> >> @@ -1746,7 +1748,7 @@ FIXTURE_SETUP(iommufd_dirty_tracking)
> >>         assert((uintptr_t)self->buffer % HUGEPAGE_SIZE == 0);
> >>         vrc = mmap(self->buffer, variant->buffer_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> >>                    mmap_flags, -1, 0);
> >> -       assert(vrc == self->buffer);
> >> +       assert(vrc == self->buffer);// ???
> >>
> >> On x86:
> >> # Totals: pass:176 fail:4 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
> >> On ARM64:
> >> # Totals: pass:166 fail:14 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
> >>
> >> The log files are attached.
> > 
> > You probably don't have enough transparent huge pages available to the process
> > 
> >       echo 1024 > /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages
> After making huge pages available, the iommufd test always passed on x86.
> But there are still failures on arm64. I'm looking into the failures.

Oh that is really strange. Joao? Nicolin?

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 139 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 140 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 144 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 145 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 149 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 150 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty640k.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 159 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 160 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty128M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 164 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 165 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap
> not ok 169 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap

> #  RUN           iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear ...
> # iommufd_utils.h:374:get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear:Expected j < npte (1) == test_bit(i + j, (unsigned long *)bitmap) (0)
> # get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear: Test terminated by assertion
> #          FAIL  iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear
> not ok 170 iommufd_dirty_tracking.domain_dirty256M_huge.get_dirty_bitmap_no_clear


  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-27 11:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-25  9:00 [PATCH] selftests: iommu: add config needed for iommufd_fail_nth Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-03-25  9:11 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-04-05  0:10   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-04-14 14:39     ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-04-15 16:09       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-03-26 13:09 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-03-26 15:03   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-03-27 10:14     ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-03-27 11:49       ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2024-03-27 14:59         ` Joao Martins
2024-03-27 17:49           ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-03-27 18:09             ` Joao Martins
2024-03-27 18:17               ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-03-27 18:33                 ` Joao Martins
2024-03-27 18:20               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2024-03-27 18:34                 ` Joao Martins
2024-03-27 20:13                 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-04-04 11:48                   ` Muhammad Usama Anjum

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=20240327114958.GG8419@ziepe.ca \
    --to=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=joao.m.martins@oracle.com \
    --cc=kernel@collabora.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=usama.anjum@collabora.com \
    /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.