From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 875F91B808; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 00:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788394939; cv=none; b=plQXZKqLrMMJkUpQFoohkBNSPhVZm+e95eD63BtSS1IebftlcNMPfUDQRuq0WaZIBW+iF0XK97Qxa10pLHDogVAxAZ3kNJUgldMxFzkVPHoqS48kn/S6Up8OJVyGyOz3+FM751vjI+lJD+4S7X+ASyUCY/mbj+mG4MkGM5b34Zw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788394939; c=relaxed/simple; bh=anklsa+KWiLfDaC+mvn0P/pKqpHnh8IBJFc4mqJ3qMI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=nJtWeW2iaoNPL8wDij52RSoPLdNgY8r8tVBHl6te7S8i8DG5DRoEU5+czEe+Gkur6Yg5DfyMDvKUF7VMHm4be7fxCz9xsC+APHueEYLM6o+Q+zQJ8lfj5+UOZyxn5PrEghZAP6ZwKj/9OjHqItb1LgX9d44JvWGd59R44YH54g0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=gECNSOex; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="gECNSOex" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BDFAC1F000E9; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 00:22:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788394938; bh=OxWQhFCQXWh0+Se6BwEJfMpRHGQJ8OFKAgPc6CcdDiQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=gECNSOex0hFA1rBKedGbmsFe8VUlJD1ARTyVupBjBwFJbckercbOnGGwi5aIOKJ6V Uz8QrhzIvz6xyIDqKBW0v8oQJgzeCpQ5b8/NntQ6Ln6BFoiQXxZVQaY66JdrgmIUgH r3h4an1LVt0/z1V78SKEumy3h/xubCLXsd41CxsvtR0jZ3fuYrtGhN9fy/GBHXO92o kurITRekpi0dlFEwjXqOqRccoCz59rhiFMQIbUayizVUdM4fgIWXAP6Gf9cEFH7Ry5 4AvQF3wcI80RgAZSFpAI1HpWTM9Gg/RSeP1BSYXeEZmSgyOe6QSipbi2gS1Gy/90Kd mB8S0W1I23X5g== From: SJ Park To: Kunwu Chan Cc: SJ Park , Kunwu Chan , Andrew Morton , Brendan Higgins , David Gow , damon@lists.linux.dev, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] mm/damon/tests/core-kunit: test damon_nr_samples_per_aggr() Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 17:22:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20260903002210.46269-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20260902154944.4035059-1-kunwu.chan@linux.dev> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 23:49:42 +0800 Kunwu Chan wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 08:19:54 -0700 SJ Park wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 23:08:41 +0800 Kunwu Chan wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 1 Sep 2026 22:47:42 -0700 SJ Park wrote: > > [...] > > > Both `sample_interval` and `aggr_interval` are zero here. Since > > > `sample_interval` is the denominator in `damon_nr_samples_per_aggr()`, > > > would it be better to keep `aggr_interval` non-zero when testing the > > > zero `sample_interval` case? > > > > > > This would make the test explicitly cover the divide-by-zero protection. > > > If the `aggr_interval == 0` behavior is also worth covering, perhaps it > > > could be tested separately. > > > > Thank you for your review and question, Kunwu! > > > > Yes, that kind of additional test case would be nice. Please feel free to post > > a patch if you'd like to! :) And no pressure, no rush. I will also consider > > doing it myself if it seems you are not interested. > > Thanks for the feedback, SJ! > > I will prepare a small follow-up patch for this test > clarity improvement. Looking forward to! > > Reviewed-by: Kunwu Chan Thank you! Also appreciate your R-b: for other patches! Thanks, SJ [...]