[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZnXwT_vkyVbIJefN@x1n>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 17:27:43 -0400
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: Audra Mitchell <audra@...hat.com>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz,
aarcange@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, shli@...com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, raquini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Turn off test_uffdio_wp if
CONFIG_PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP is not configured.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 02:12:24PM -0400, Audra Mitchell wrote:
> If CONFIG_PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP is disabled, then testing with test_uffdio_up
Here you're talking about pte markers, then..
> enables calling uffdio_regsiter with the flag UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_WP. The
> kernel ensures in vma_can_userfault() that if CONFIG_PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP
> is disabled, only allow the VM_UFFD_WP on anonymous vmas.
>
> Signed-off-by: Audra Mitchell <audra@...hat.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-stress.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-stress.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-stress.c
> index b9b6d858eab8..2601c9dfadd6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-stress.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-stress.c
> @@ -419,6 +419,9 @@ static void parse_test_type_arg(const char *raw_type)
> test_uffdio_wp = test_uffdio_wp &&
> (features & UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP);
>
> + if (test_type != TEST_ANON && !(features & UFFD_FEATURE_WP_UNPOPULATED))
> + test_uffdio_wp = false;
... here you're checking against wp_unpopulated. I'm slightly confused.
Are you running this test over shmem/hugetlb when the WP feature isn't
supported?
I'm wondering whether you're looking for UFFD_FEATURE_WP_HUGETLBFS_SHMEM
instead.
Thanks,
> +
> close(uffd);
> uffd = -1;
> }
> --
> 2.44.0
>
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists