linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] selftests/mm/charge_reserved_hugetlb: fix hugetlbfs mount size for large hugepages

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: <970fa015-9ec8-4903-8e2f-f3e847d550d1@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2025 10:17:12 +0100
From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
To: Li Wang <liwang@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] selftests/mm/charge_reserved_hugetlb: fix
 hugetlbfs mount size for large hugepages

On 12/21/25 09:58, Li Wang wrote:
> charge_reserved_hugetlb.sh mounts a hugetlbfs instance at /mnt/huge with
> a fixed size of 256M. On systems with large base hugepages (e.g. 512MB),
> this is smaller than a single hugepage, so the hugetlbfs mount ends up
> with effectively zero capacity (often visible as size=0 in mount output).
> 
> As a result, write_to_hugetlbfs fails with ENOMEM and the test can hang
> waiting for progress.

I'm curious, what's the history of using "256MB" in the first place (or 
specifying any size?).

-- 
Cheers

David