linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] mm/selftests: Fix split_huge_page_test failure on systems with 64KB page size

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1399003a-31e6-42e3-9457-24c0a89e8757@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 11:43:56 +0530
From: Donet Tom <donettom@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
        Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
        lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, shuah@...nel.org, pfalcato@...e.de,
        david@...hat.com, ziy@...dia.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
        npache@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com, dev.jain@....com,
        baohua@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ritesh.list@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] mm/selftests: Fix split_huge_page_test failure on
 systems with 64KB page size


On 8/4/25 2:34 PM, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 11:04:00AM +0530, Aboorva Devarajan wrote:
>> From: Donet Tom <donettom@...ux.ibm.com>
>>
>> The split_huge_page_test fails on systems with a 64KB base page size.
>> This is because the order of a 2MB huge page is different:
>>
>> On 64KB systems, the order is 5.
>>
>> On 4KB systems, it's 9.
>>
>> The test currently assumes a maximum huge page order of 9, which is only
>> valid for 4KB base page systems. On systems with 64KB pages, attempting
>> to split huge pages beyond their actual order (5) causes the test to fail.
>>
>> In this patch, we calculate the huge page order based on the system's base
>> page size. With this change, the tests now run successfully on both 64KB
>> and 4KB page size systems.
>>
>> Fixes: fa6c02315f745 ("mm: huge_memory: a new debugfs interface for splitting THP tests")
>> Reviewed-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
>> Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Aboorva Devarajan <aboorvad@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Donet Tom <donettom@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> .../selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c       | 23 ++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
>> index 05de1fc0005b..718daceb5282 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
>> @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ uint64_t pmd_pagesize;
>>
>> #define PFN_MASK     ((1UL<<55)-1)
>> #define KPF_THP      (1UL<<22)
>> +#define GET_ORDER(nr_pages)    (31 - __builtin_clz(nr_pages))
>>
>> int is_backed_by_thp(char *vaddr, int pagemap_file, int kpageflags_file)
>> {
>> @@ -522,6 +523,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>> 	const char *fs_loc;
>> 	bool created_tmp;
>> 	int offset;
>> +	unsigned int max_order;
>> +	unsigned int nr_pages;
>> +	unsigned int tests;
>>
>> 	ksft_print_header();
>>
>> @@ -533,35 +537,38 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>> 	if (argc > 1)
>> 		optional_xfs_path = argv[1];
>>
>> -	ksft_set_plan(1+8+1+9+9+8*4+2);
>> -
>> 	pagesize = getpagesize();
>> 	pageshift = ffs(pagesize) - 1;
>> 	pmd_pagesize = read_pmd_pagesize();
>> 	if (!pmd_pagesize)
>> 		ksft_exit_fail_msg("Reading PMD pagesize failed\n");
>>
>> +	nr_pages = pmd_pagesize / pagesize;
>> +	max_order = GET_ORDER(nr_pages);
> There is a sz2ord() in cow.c and uffd-wp-mremap.c.
>
> Maybe we can factor it into vm_util.h and use it here.

Sure, I will make the change and send a new version.

>