From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30D73C73F7; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 12:33:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790598783; cv=none; b=oRM4H/yj34zVBlTnCV6klXpRwRxNjokwZK9FYoEuDTPbRcOjvuJzGN1I3RvvncFSwhU0hUVWvIyKBZqZZnWjaVawuXHrgDat80WFADNFr81JOikWDAjQE/E9fyicThQ+vffvSWT3bxrWaYvJRJAgGCmT6nkjrv2bFnUWJYxcu6Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790598783; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Iya9wujgQEdqUfmH+V2H4et1ziGVCRoqLQ6GAz7eQu0=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=MxQUMmWpKHqramclACeGwqOvFLJSWW8P7ayBzXGABZZV1SOrPvY4dtXv85dc8hOTJ33V6U2peZdCsJnCFzZFHlxRnSHVMwYgK9tAsutXyaOOjuQab1u51vJxFp6rpLOl5eXGGn6kockpEF5f3OinzlgGUuZkbH8wKvJBZG1v4Dg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=v4gh2dMD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="v4gh2dMD" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=Iya9wujgQEdqUfmH+V2H4et1ziGVCRoqLQ6GAz7eQu0=; t=1790598781; x=1791808381; b=v4gh2dMDUsVDk+sg2amC8alPBTQ4LlH14hjBEtXiEF85h+g gUHisUAIie+2SR+5isvFeY5ceq6PBTAYJn61cbPp+X/HwQWhawio/uJXeJDqt6xUyRYri9HJMa51d otoG7ReWnM74Hl9BVReg5ciwWXkRW64ATzMnQqTbBJOw+1BpCEOvW0IGypa4VLD23VIh95CZfBnSV nPk7ueYXUc2rzoUVoz/wNd+Km9T5H98UFqshUQDW1gKZZK1xz5DhlBhBrI/n37xRKZ+tOeBEX+oQf MQK3XJs4gKME7w+UMUlYE3JzuQS5DLcgaD8O6Qy/lVNbTC0PK/8IMFgRsf51vSdA==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__ECDSA_SECP256R1_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1xBAXM-0000000DXzf-0Rx8; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:32:52 +0200 Message-ID: <8dfc0ec9ed660e373451c96b6fcc352c35a6a004.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] selftests: run tests on nommu architecture From: Johannes Berg To: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" Cc: Hajime Tazaki , linux-mm@kvack.org, liam@infradead.org, rbm@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, luto@amacapital.net, brendan.jackman@linux.dev, david@kernel.org, liuhangbin@gmail.com, corbet@lwn.net, kees@kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com, rppt@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, vbabka@kernel.org, wad@chromium.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, daniel@thingy.jp Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:32:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20260926010819.604346-1-thehajime@gmail.com> <20260926010819.604346-3-thehajime@gmail.com> <04259a99ed91f8a527b255951a6f626310728170.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.60.2 (3.60.2-2.fc44) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Mon, 2026-09-28 at 12:00 +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote: > > Not sure where this should be merged? I guess selftests would make most > > sense, but you can't actually test it out before the UML nommu changes, > > so that doesn't work too well right now? >=20 > I seem to recall Hajime saying he tested this on an actual nommu > device/virtualised equivalent so nommu UML isn't strictly necessary (thou= gh very > nice to have!) Oh, I don't recall, but I guess that's plausibe. > I think I saw something fly by that implied it might be coming in 7.4 is = that > so? :) I did end up merging just about everything that was pending for uml/next, so if we don't forget to send a pull request in the merge window, or something equally catastrophic happens, yes ;-) Sorry for the delay. The onslaught of LLMs means priority is elsewhere, sadly. johannes