[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250723110559.32219-1-lianux.mm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 19:05:59 +0800
From: wang lian <lianux.mm@...il.com>
To: ziy@...dia.com
Cc: Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
brauner@...nel.org,
broonie@...nel.org,
david@...hat.com,
gkwang@...x-info.com,
jannh@...gle.com,
lianux.mm@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
p1ucky0923@...il.com,
ryncsn@...il.com,
shuah@...nel.org,
sj@...nel.org,
vbabka@...e.cz,
zijing.zhang@...ton.me
Subject:
From: wang lian <lianux.mm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] selftests/mm: add process_madvise() tests
> Here an invalid address range is provided, since pid is checked before
> address ranges are checked.
> BTW, the size of iovec array cannot be bigger than IOV_MAX. It might be
> worth testing as well, if you want to.
> With default_huge_page_size() -> read_pmd_pagesize() fix, feel free to
> add:
> Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
> Tested-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
> I am able to compile and run the test on arm64. Thanks.
> Best Regards,
> Yan, Zi
Hi Zi,
Thanks a lot for your review and the valuable feedback! The issues you've pointed out are very helpful.
Regarding the logic where the PID is checked before the address ranges,
that was an oversight on my part and I will fix it.
I'll also add the test case for the iovec array size against IOV_MAX as you suggested.
And thank you for adding your Reviewed-by and Tested-by tags when i fix this.
I plan to collect all the review comments, revise the patches, and send out a new version
with your tags included in the next 2-3 days.
Thanks again!
Best Regards,
Wang Lian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists