From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f171.google.com (mail-pf1-f171.google.com [209.85.210.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B4AC749C; Fri, 24 May 2024 06:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716533577; cv=none; b=Pi/nnfP+fB/fw1npfSFeEveahTsj7J6045P71fI/ZpMzEyuHGqT0lW3bJrwpkJ8doGD65apxfssaUHww+ZsQx73OtMzAF4vYiyi+gCgj1bcGgaUyassI6YIBB466EYt8T0fkJMJSznjDJHyTm3681W6kqgmHq0qyJJwyAbmvYGs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716533577; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IcA8areGBmtYySpKsN1vV7VjabAeCliqI9BnabnxYUw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=Kr9XpFB8k+ek9S/yFC07R282KsgYBlLPKr9C9Z8Hcrw5N360txGZSXuwx7BubjAs1SmlCO4TKS2TdoqLuXZoMu/SaF+ajO72QbdICfW3o1d/H4iqFtj5tstes4dxAvVyyc/vth6qqPpF1ptlbmZZsd/Ss9tGUeRr3QdZaUpLIuQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=nUhZv0o6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="nUhZv0o6" Received: by mail-pf1-f171.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6f8edff35a0so467509b3a.2; Thu, 23 May 2024 23:52:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1716533575; x=1717138375; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ykVoCzYAXxgYfsHCRKZ4/jVPW0FI1w87SrBVTf97eqM=; b=nUhZv0o6ncGQOriNb3/F9yu/80UgAqCL+KA625jf6q2izZyg8nYAgnfLMkoEpHnnda RpEw8AlfkLzP/bLTG9jhaRaZmpgesUhG7Nf8PUMcEeOJ3yWJNce/kRSONrX1gt1SKdNF fQ/3ZmTNl0OyLT8irj9tUsfYiCOQwmRqjxCW5vl3EgShfbXsyMDMntjE4lENm3owSqWV fxsvArUPX9a4uoCTMOEauryrhRfeVchS/zLajs5xIw+v2qUdB3gtveG0K5aZCSNDhOjs 73QsbA7JB/RfZU3gi4GmbVMuUj/QVi+CfvXqHIFdQcxPB6pgillNbWaQgmsjTyBblwdc rGOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1716533575; x=1717138375; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ykVoCzYAXxgYfsHCRKZ4/jVPW0FI1w87SrBVTf97eqM=; b=cnv4sfnH89PDtAxdZxiCO7MzvXPrnjX/v1ReGmY/tlukb911hhETdL0KokUswhTeZG QMeCpQyYWH2WaoHxzfZFMFgL+2087us07Ns6rlH2vxvxOVh0qJu02dOvPVY2fFUrpuRu pE094i7IEYkiZZXgjnr4cXOsnz+iNxv757Lk8GQOSjTkRSumCnzdzNXf1Q5TSfHSpbhy KT9fDv2lkHvcFFPzEjUiX+ZPuiM2lIjHptYG0+65UU03u3gF+cEHEgC/tDwgTStbbx1f fynUsvbnqB+61JfDnhjGmaLqXOZPe9eQR4+X35oDejTx51wPkXcwzj7O24OGkygIpzbE XQ7g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVFOIr1ZocP9CA/OYGCtfrMllj00sSXwrGYeuT+aFQJqqz4IT+eb+95XrLUUYznm26z3lYzJf6bD+/LgOsvqCWiYoA/SU/BLrr7f8b1W3k1yVVNPEG+utGkYHe6B0cfiI/bU7nRwbrEJCDXE4TU X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwqDyhqTM0dhxsi6eN62Z9D6Y10Z4OMe4WYirf1yoNS95SSDKsF f3TjT5w04QdaKA4MmC8PHizuKTDzNWYMpy/cKDK9oJqeVQU0AKC4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFeHmKmJv50+uxoFGpkU0wNY7hJ3X7HEEhI+59tWnSNxwwR2DeReAt6XXA5R0PCcd9vrR99RA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:418a:b0:6ea:df6a:39e7 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6f8f2d7247cmr1513112b3a.13.1716533575418; Thu, 23 May 2024 23:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dw-tp ([129.41.58.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-6f8fc053bd6sm582396b3a.45.2024.05.23.23.52.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 May 2024 23:52:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) To: David Hildenbrand , Andrew Morton Cc: Donet Tom , Shuah Khan , Matthew Wilcox , Tony Battersby , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport , Muchun Song Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftest: mm: Test if hugepage does not get leaked during __bio_release_pages() In-Reply-To: <7792c8ba-39e6-47ee-9b43-108270325c15@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 12:13:04 +0530 Message-ID: <87o78vsoav.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20240523063905.3173-1-donettom@linux.ibm.com> <20240523121344.6a67a109e0af2ba70973b34b@linux-foundation.org> <20240523195734.bc03a8822a34b1a97880fb65@linux-foundation.org> <7792c8ba-39e6-47ee-9b43-108270325c15@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: David Hildenbrand writes: dropping stable@vger.kernel.org > On 24.05.24 04:57, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Thu, 23 May 2024 22:40:25 +0200 David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >>>> You have stable@vger.kernel.org in the mail headers, so I assume you're >>>> proposing this for backporting. When doing this, please include >>>> >>>> Cc: >>>> >>>> in the changelog footers and also include a Fixes: target. I'm >>>> assuming the suitable Fixes: target for this patch is 38b43539d64b? >>> >>> This adds a new selfest to make sure what was fixed (and backported to >>> stable) remains fixed. >> >> Sure. But we should provide -stable maintainers guidance for "how far >> back to go". There isn't much point in backporting this into kernels >> where it's known to fail! > > I'm probably missing something important. > > 1) It's a test that does not fall into the common stable kernels > categories (see Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst). > > 2) If it fails in a kernel *it achieved its goal* of highlighting that > something serious is broken. > >> >> I'm still thinking that we want this in kernels which have 38b43539d64b? > > To hide that the other kernels are seriously broken and miss that fix? > > Really (1) this shouldn't be backported. I'm not even sure it should be > a selftest (sounds more like a reproducer that we usually attach to > commits, but that's too late). And if people care about backporting it, > (2) you really want this test to succeed everywhere. Especially also to > find kernels *without* 38b43539d64b Sorry about the noise and cc'd to stable. I believe we don't need to backport this test. The idea of adding a selftests was "also" to catch any future bugs like this. I am unaware of any functional test suite where we could add such tests like how filesystems have fstests. Hence the ideas was to add this in selftests. So this begs the question which I also asked few people at LSFMM, Does mm has any mmfvt (mm functional verification tests)? Should we have something like this? Was it tried in past? (Sorry, mmtests name is already taken - "MMTests is a configurable test suite that runs performance tests against arbitrary workloads.") -ritesh > > -- > Cheers, > > David / dhildenb