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 picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCE84C88E77 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 09:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 467FC3E694F for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:38:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C54963C98AB for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:38:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mta0.migadu.com (out-150.mta0.migadu.com [IPv6:2001:41d0:1004:224b::96]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 167A36006F1 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:37:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Envelope-To: ltp@lists.linux.it DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=db/PJf4mIwldmQkdAa2BkgtrS+MzbdZPUceXjxFa4ak=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1789551479; v=1; x=1790156279; b=Z9GN6J3Q/dvXJuPTo0KpbPeZnMkz7q/G8XBxwzeuC11mgiinbZI9pAcXZ0YjAB+HdCgMqxAW Ti5avGEIrqbFj57r3u5lVfqYvMKD9jfb9nOPDjzg7JGYRiH4N82uJpAIhJJLQ7u5gqW6cNzpEy6 Yl4jcHjkec+85svl9fz+KVjE= X-Envelope-To: ltp@lists.linux.it Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 34bd29999afaa648; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 09:37:49 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 34bd29999afaa648 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:37:42 +0800 From: Li Wang To: Huaisheng Ye , tsahu@linux.ibm.com, pvorel@suse.cz, ltp@lists.linux.it Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Huaisheng Ye , tsahu@linux.ibm.com, pvorel@suse.cz, ltp@lists.linux.it References: <20260914032359.9956-1-yehuaisheng@open-hieco.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.9 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] hugemmap10: Account for memory policy in counter checks X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > > Aside from this patch, my test encountered new failures on a four-node system. > Without your patch, the surplus failure can be reproduced consistently, so I > suspect it's a different issue. > > ... > hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Total: expected 1, actual 2 > hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Free: expected 1, actual 2 > hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Surp: expected 0, actual 1 The test system has four nodes, and only nodes 0 and 2 have memory. I guess that's what caused the failure when running hugemmap10 during hugepage allocation. Something like this: 1. The test pre-allocates 1 hugepage, which defaults to Node 0. 2. When the test runs on Node 2, the kernel dynamically creates a surplus hugepage on Node 2 to ensure local memory performance. 3. The global hugepage count becomes 2 (1 on Node 0 + 1 surplus on Node 2). 4. The test expects exactly 1 global hugepage, so it reports a failure. Below are the test results from patched-hugemmap10 on patched-kernel-6.6. I'll do more investigation tomorrow. [root@SL26GA ~]# numactl -H available: 4 nodes (0-3) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 node 0 size: 31729 MB node 0 free: 30582 MB node 1 cpus: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 node 1 size: 0 MB node 1 free: 0 MB node 2 cpus: 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 node 2 size: 31896 MB node 2 free: 30627 MB node 3 cpus: 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 node 3 size: 0 MB node 3 free: 0 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 15 42 38 1: 15 10 38 33 2: 42 38 10 15 3: 38 33 15 10 [root@SL26GA hugemmap]# numactl --cpunodebind=0 ./hugemmap10 tst_hugepage.c:84: TINFO: 6 hugepage(s) reserved tst_tmpdir.c:308: TINFO: Using /tmp/LTP_hug9CXa7r as tmpdir (tmpfs filesystem) tst_test.c:1233: TINFO: Mounting none to /tmp/LTP_hug9CXa7r/hugetlbfs fstyp=hugetlbfs flags=0 tst_test.c:2065: TINFO: LTP version: 20260529 tst_test.c:2068: TINFO: Tested kernel: 6.6.145-9.sl26.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Sep 3 11:08:39 CST 2026 x86_64 tst_kconfig.c:90: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz' tst_test.c:1893: TINFO: Overall timeout per run is 0h 00m 30s hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 0 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 1 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 2 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 3 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:500: TPASS: Hugepages Counters works as expected. Summary: passed 1 failed 0 broken 0 skipped 0 warnings 0 [root@SL26GA hugemmap]# numactl --cpunodebind=2 ./hugemmap10 tst_hugepage.c:84: TINFO: 6 hugepage(s) reserved tst_tmpdir.c:308: TINFO: Using /tmp/LTP_hugVJVuKk as tmpdir (tmpfs filesystem) tst_test.c:1233: TINFO: Mounting none to /tmp/LTP_hugVJVuKk/hugetlbfs fstyp=hugetlbfs flags=0 tst_test.c:2065: TINFO: LTP version: 20260529 tst_test.c:2068: TINFO: Tested kernel: 6.6.145-9.sl26.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Sep 3 11:08:39 CST 2026 x86_64 tst_kconfig.c:90: TINFO: Parsing kernel config '/proc/config.gz' tst_test.c:1893: TINFO: Overall timeout per run is 0h 00m 30s hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 0 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, shared... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Touched, private... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:457: TINFO: Base pool size: 1 hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Clean... hugemmap10.c:435: TINFO: OK hugemmap10.c:384: TINFO: Untouched, shared... hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Total: expected 1, actual 2 hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Free: expected 1, actual 2 hugemmap10.c:402: TFAIL: While doing munmap shared after touch: Bad HugePages_Surp: expected 0, actual 1 Summary: passed 0 failed 3 broken 0 skipped 0 warnings 0 -- Regards, Li Wang -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp