[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <E4EAA455-4AB0-4122-92B6-F0F5FE56041A@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2025 10:24:32 -0400
From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hughd@...gle.com, willy@...radead.org,
david@...hat.com, 21cnbao@...il.com, ryan.roberts@....com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests: mincore: fix tmpfs mincore test failure
On 7 Apr 2025, at 7:31, Baolin Wang wrote:
> When running mincore test cases, I encountered the following failures:
>
> "
> mincore_selftest.c:359:check_tmpfs_mmap:Expected ra_pages (511) == 0 (0)
> mincore_selftest.c:360:check_tmpfs_mmap:Read-ahead pages found in memory
> check_tmpfs_mmap: Test terminated by assertion
> FAIL global.check_tmpfs_mmap
> not ok 5 global.check_tmpfs_mmap
> FAILED: 4 / 5 tests passed
> "
>
> The reason for the test case failure is that my system automatically enabled
> tmpfs large folio allocation by adding the 'transparent_hugepage_tmpfs=always'
> cmdline. However, the test case still expects the tmpfs mounted on /dev/shm to
> allocate small folios, which leads to assertion failures when verifying readahead
> pages.
>
> As discussed with David, there's no reason to continue checking the readahead
> logic for tmpfs. Drop it to fix this issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> Changes from v1:
> - Drop the readahead logic check, per David.
> ---
> .../testing/selftests/mincore/mincore_selftest.c | 16 ++--------------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists