From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E7FC32789 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 10:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33CC20685 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 10:42:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="SNZqjvjR" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D33CC20685 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726758AbeKHURK (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 15:17:10 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f196.google.com ([209.85.167.196]:39766 "EHLO mail-oi1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726145AbeKHURK (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 15:17:10 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f196.google.com with SMTP id 192-v6so15750076oii.6 for ; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 02:42:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Lkmh31+hoVnFy+XkyCL9z7DMuR9lvV88UEn3MyyZNoc=; b=SNZqjvjRIqO1LvQS/BQpIZK4G3NqHEPyCs7tpTdeMg+EtbOMmdZWoDlLcHpTKEqqPS HqChvflQaptYoSBadPMvoq7xdE7IuLicyboAU4Lb+zYhLSCpNPrwmleJFhr3CK9ThGhx 9mFBZgFg6bsNedZJW3DePk96NHpEwXFfzsl84= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Lkmh31+hoVnFy+XkyCL9z7DMuR9lvV88UEn3MyyZNoc=; b=W9mVmtynt80OVLiZ4rH6BHWjf2064G3j5OsRExhPDOJsdND41H4C++DmZLUhazmoqQ WTrLmVGTliEwW7EaPMqu2UwxokmEsVpC9vITjes46BuwwymNLBTM1Y1K7ENMHZ9AbPfI cMyr8drC7fD80sNqr3eJz8F1yqrM4pbGjAGIWD72tGQ8TivyXSUYfISiB0kONZqTb/Go PBKw9U7bcsWoenRycEn1ARAe6YqizTLdlSyC8rmTD8HkEtD57wciCANqKjQ9CR2ASXAV y2WNmf4D8ckosrBKYNQKKOqzIq+HUd+ffaD8sM1HHmczUviyf67PygS1Vwk0Li6EW4SE Y9iw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLnaK9lblzA8eeg1hkExUstdasEENGZSra8uBqloz83bUYDKB6V TRgnC9jDXMLnHSt9KsiciTcVIRXzuiJ/1Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dz2rmtPBUk3VQn4Z5OTIWknnH/Svz6xPR6dL2SDFBYPnMUluKiWzkA+goQXO+oK0VWpK3MPA== X-Received: by 2002:aca:bc44:: with SMTP id m65-v6mr2355988oif.28.1541673738610; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 02:42:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot1-f52.google.com (mail-ot1-f52.google.com. [209.85.210.52]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e191-v6sm286780oig.39.2018.11.08.02.42.16 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 08 Nov 2018 02:42:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot1-f52.google.com with SMTP id t5so14083469otk.1 for ; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 02:42:16 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:635a:: with SMTP id y26mr2254628otk.27.1541673736486; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 02:42:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ac9:775a:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 02:41:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> References: <20181011184359.15627-1-rafael.tinoco@linaro.org> <20181011205601.GA32757@avx2> <20181011210256.GE2401@uranus.lan> <20181011213006.GA13485@avx2> <20181011220009.GF2401@uranus.lan> <52504bd5-b4ed-518b-f748-c634172c6c68@linaro.org> <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> From: Rafael David Tinoco Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 08:41:46 -0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: fix proc-self-map-files selftest for arm To: Cyrill Gorcunov Cc: Rafael David Tinoco , Alexey Dobriyan , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, shuah@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 01:55:14PM -0300, Rafael David Tinoco wrote: >> That is what I also had in mind, thus the patch. I just realized we had >> another issue on LKFT (our functional tests tool) for >> proc-self-map-files-001.c. Test 001 does pretty much the same as 002, but >> without the MAP_FIXED mmap flag. >> >> Is it okay to consolidate both tests into just 1, and focus in checking >> procfs numbers conversion only, rather than if mapping 0 is allowed or not ? >> Can I send a v2 with that in mind ? > > As to me -- yes, I would move zero page testing to a separate memory testcase. > But since Alexey is the former author of the tests better wait for his opinion. Alexey, would you care if we turn those 2 tests into 1, taking care of the zero page testing elsewhere ? Would you mind if I send out a patch for that ? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rafael.tinoco at linaro.org (Rafael David Tinoco) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 08:41:46 -0200 Subject: [PATCH] proc: fix proc-self-map-files selftest for arm In-Reply-To: <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> References: <20181011184359.15627-1-rafael.tinoco@linaro.org> <20181011205601.GA32757@avx2> <20181011210256.GE2401@uranus.lan> <20181011213006.GA13485@avx2> <20181011220009.GF2401@uranus.lan> <52504bd5-b4ed-518b-f748-c634172c6c68@linaro.org> <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 01:55:14PM -0300, Rafael David Tinoco wrote: >> That is what I also had in mind, thus the patch. I just realized we had >> another issue on LKFT (our functional tests tool) for >> proc-self-map-files-001.c. Test 001 does pretty much the same as 002, but >> without the MAP_FIXED mmap flag. >> >> Is it okay to consolidate both tests into just 1, and focus in checking >> procfs numbers conversion only, rather than if mapping 0 is allowed or not ? >> Can I send a v2 with that in mind ? > > As to me -- yes, I would move zero page testing to a separate memory testcase. > But since Alexey is the former author of the tests better wait for his opinion. Alexey, would you care if we turn those 2 tests into 1, taking care of the zero page testing elsewhere ? Would you mind if I send out a patch for that ? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rafael.tinoco@linaro.org (Rafael David Tinoco) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 08:41:46 -0200 Subject: [PATCH] proc: fix proc-self-map-files selftest for arm In-Reply-To: <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> References: <20181011184359.15627-1-rafael.tinoco@linaro.org> <20181011205601.GA32757@avx2> <20181011210256.GE2401@uranus.lan> <20181011213006.GA13485@avx2> <20181011220009.GF2401@uranus.lan> <52504bd5-b4ed-518b-f748-c634172c6c68@linaro.org> <20181015172140.GJ2401@uranus.lan> Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <20181108104146.iXytsMXYhfMOv6yfn9tGs2AZ837Pv5P0Cqns7KUbEGw@z> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018@2:21 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018@01:55:14PM -0300, Rafael David Tinoco wrote: >> That is what I also had in mind, thus the patch. I just realized we had >> another issue on LKFT (our functional tests tool) for >> proc-self-map-files-001.c. Test 001 does pretty much the same as 002, but >> without the MAP_FIXED mmap flag. >> >> Is it okay to consolidate both tests into just 1, and focus in checking >> procfs numbers conversion only, rather than if mapping 0 is allowed or not ? >> Can I send a v2 with that in mind ? > > As to me -- yes, I would move zero page testing to a separate memory testcase. > But since Alexey is the former author of the tests better wait for his opinion. Alexey, would you care if we turn those 2 tests into 1, taking care of the zero page testing elsewhere ? Would you mind if I send out a patch for that ?