From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A9BC4345F for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:18:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id B33656B0087; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 10:18:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id AE2BB6B0088; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 10:18:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9D0E06B0089; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 10:18:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74CFA6B0087 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 10:18:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22322121053 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:18:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82062775452.03.057B9C7 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71397C0023 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:18:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=k+fhj62D; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1714400323; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=WzqvzqnQd1rmpmt2F0qPBP1qREQNdbtN5DdeTgFoYf0=; b=tdrLlBRylZZSHZUMmKiEO5borA7CoBi1n5+3RxlF2NWqmSv2mDBq1KnORH1fFpNVsw+BoR YkYIcU9g4MXij8iAq3WILgWWKCJ8u7aCEAGhTl80NOsi0B//2aHm4LrazSvzSrOqgnfS0U 0vWUax48Dcjk6Ahf1CpB78RCGDkvXG4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=k+fhj62D; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1714400323; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Yejbnz1bQzlhKELhmoWfPpO8J+GivSOc7/TmfdA+81NGod2CuMgm/o4i43SkPnWb8mZCne ccqf0luv7ugq15RuN/hdrs+E5hoKohrA5bm748McDx6Qcoz6Umk8JZHV9TWvT3hlVmzk8O 044sA/1ae4E8FMfsanrcAt/zACgoBIo= Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6FB60C04; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:18:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D673C4AF1A; Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:18:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1714400321; bh=sC98O2XyezwGCqq0Y6MZQmNlKmlxz+nT4+6BJeMB9js=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=k+fhj62DKOZ9I3mhA220gw3hS90HHg1bNWi1oe5quH9JRecDjdoe/OPyP/tqMyOUI /+dRE4t9d5Dnhl/0cBjvWS2pn+miyb1bOXZyOVfvub+Fv/4NcCtDeWON1+k+v7ftGP SGWwkQM+248SWJZMdg2VIiSv12eiWAGN1mt+IdTeXklLgyalcUXaQtcEnOOP1de/RM Hlj3qp4QmviILcjTzhBjm+wiW+3ffg0GgQLHlAjx1vD5W3bNxLMQAsrR+YQWsx9vPt 5NQyICr8JefVowK0hrBwWyqMDNEl2JZh/2+/toqrbMYyY6mBvMVyCQFyatDhiDRppD nMpVFzvZQkNQA== Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:17:19 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Wei Yang Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [Patch v2 1/8] memblock tests: reserve the 129th memory block at all possible position Message-ID: References: <20240425071929.18004-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com> <20240425071929.18004-2-richard.weiyang@gmail.com> <20240428122204.4ecwvc2qxrstl6yv@master> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240428122204.4ecwvc2qxrstl6yv@master> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 71397C0023 X-Stat-Signature: xuo6k4unzp79inzc1d8zgoyagart46zg X-HE-Tag: 1714400323-852209 X-HE-Meta: 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 LD4Xfz/D 5Dit10z+d6WEugmaRa8vyFQ40V/7IrvtOtphHDD6ra9LphoZIz1jqu3iLNHyhF6onccG2I2VDU34rWLZcC4oCl3kJpbee69fcbMXxJnc+KG3u0HKIyZ112HHQR9zAckmX00tg9pRHr8iXZ2LwcIscz2lldYFP8ClBu2OOEmHc+Wmqh2EgcW4emgyyS4kQlFtiyWJBu4yAlLlnxiTagH4EE2ZG5tpJBEF7p+MRlPmqb12Mig/kaQeahvXntw== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 12:22:04PM +0000, Wei Yang wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 09:35:25AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 07:19:22AM +0000, Wei Yang wrote: > >> In stead of add 129th memory block at the last position, let's try all > >> possible position. > > > >Why do you insist on changing the existing test rather than adding a new > >one? > > > > Sounds there is some misunderstanding between us. > > I am not sure about your idea at first, so I sent a draft to confirm with you. > Then I came up with another version which could trigger the overlap bug. > > You mentioned to keep both and not objection to the first draft, which is the > same as this one, I thought this is what you expect. Sorry if I wasn't clear. My intention was to keep the existing test and add a new one rather than update the old test. > Well, I will add a new one next round. Do you have some suggestion on the > function name? memblock_reserve_many_all_position_check ? How about memblock_reserve_all_locations_check? > >> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang > >> --- > >> tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 121 ++++++++++++----------- > >> 1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > > > > >-- > >Sincerely yours, > >Mike. > > -- > Wei Yang > Help you, Help me -- Sincerely yours, Mike.