Re: [PATCH 6.1.y] selftests/mm: Move default_huge_page_size to vm_util.c

Greg KH
2025-10-22T14:26:54Z

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 09:34:52PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/10/22 16:20, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 04:08:45PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 22/10/25 15:40, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 01:51:38PM +0800, Leon Hwang wrote:
> >>>> Fix the build error:
> >>>>
> >>>> map_hugetlb.c: In function 'main':
> >>>> map_hugetlb.c:79:25: warning: implicit declaration of function 'default_huge_page_size' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> >>>> 79 | hugepage_size = default_huge_page_size();
> >>>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccYOogvJ.o: in function 'main':
> >>>> map_hugetlb.c:(.text+0x114): undefined reference to 'default_huge_page_size'
> >>>>
> >>>> According to the latest selftests, 'default_huge_page_size' has been
> >>>> moved to 'vm_util.c'. So fix the error by the same way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>> tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 24 ------------------------
> >>>> tools/testing/selftests/vm/vm_util.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> tools/testing/selftests/vm/vm_util.h | 1 +
> >>>> 4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What commit id does this fix? And again, why not just take the original
> >>
> >> Let me check which commit introduced the fix.
> >>
> >>> commits instead?
> >>
> >> I agree that taking the original commits would be preferable.
> >>
> >> However, it might involve quite a few patches to backport, which could
> >> be a bit of work.
> >
> > We can easily take lots of patches, don't worry about the quantity. But
> > it would be good to figure out what caused this to break here, and not
> > in other branches.
> >
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> After checking with 'git blame map_hugetlb.c', the issue was introduced
> by commit a584c7734a4d (“selftests: mm: fix map_hugetlb failure on 64K
> page size systems”), which corresponds to upstream commit 91b80cc5b39f.
> This change appears to have caused the build error in the 6.1.y tree.
>
> Comparing several stable trees shows the following:
>
> - 6.0.y: not backported*
> - 6.1.y: backported
> - 6.2.y: not backported*
> - 6.3.y: not backported*
> - 6.4.y: not backported*
> - 6.5.y: not backported*
> - 6.6.y: backported
> - 6.7.y: backported
>
> Given this, it might be preferable to revert a584c7734a4d in 6.1.y for
> consistency with the other stable trees (6.0.y, 6.2–6.5.y).

Ah, yeah, it looks like this commit was reverted from other stable
releases, as it shows up in the following releases:

4.19.310 4.19.315 5.4.272 5.4.277 5.10.213 5.10.218 5.15.152 5.15.160 6.1.82 6.6.18 6.7.6

So a revert would be fine, want to submit it?

thanks,

greg k-h