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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E832C433F5 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 10:15:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D0B261261 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 10:15:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231972AbhKKKRs (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:17:48 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:35393 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229668AbhKKKRr (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:17:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1636625698; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=S6uLPKDqybSu7Fq7/4bbc9+ZGKFbryIRKLHIHdtT3Fo=; b=MVb1QDBWn1vBg36kzcgwXjow0u7ENGNWCbtSiD8VxOMP0RYvfDNGu8Meo9RDtjLubM88ji XBxIZ0mp9kyEtPbamwsKRPSbYm3AgREJ2qLP7iiV/1Nk3glmAi/gYrOYeX0mNU8z3V4H89 nqIbRs8+Fm6W9/HPOY+JEdI8ZqcEzL4= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-64-Y2kAwoUuPlKgGljN-4dkWQ-1; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:14:56 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Y2kAwoUuPlKgGljN-4dkWQ-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id l187-20020a1c25c4000000b0030da46b76daso4536784wml.9 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 02:14:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=S6uLPKDqybSu7Fq7/4bbc9+ZGKFbryIRKLHIHdtT3Fo=; b=jaxmG0y49RSFVkmD5sapNK//MbgJRfBmJUwoQ9UTzOyIZrQjVjyKmZs+KH7F7eVf+W iFjKDBuh0vP83miVesXBpNj7tYgtwQxLPkixQ1F0zfB98TLbGyS1K1QCQypZC9EogQuC 4iP6jVXL5ooCujQM2FA73ChkPuz3HzCrLpeIq+mgtYCDpHWRiGSVBfYZOnSl87YG537O WTXtzeVjWzedf3DtyAjgSXy4OjVt8k9Pxrx3Fcl/Q7PZ9XB/EKMzapJeIzp+sWEfwHOT pB7dreX6iYruiDiVqAhjbnGdBVA2AFnzfS07jMRY+9LL3L9JjMc1VRFsPGRBV8O2pCaO XqCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533nhv9R1IA9jOrqdV4OgFLUHTRc88ZsanIdEkmc6OPu/SXjzU0Z UeV5+jH3TTCoR/MUP3uBWpJWUzAwKy+nmvXIzZ4zZaoSp4sFeUT0GEpXouMPiURnRhy6WXo+X5f nXqKXjkjeC3pD X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1f19:: with SMTP id bd25mr6882301wmb.75.1636625695701; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 02:14:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzBNrHKgmHWGR0+83D7VSH3NXiNnC//iQeYxy4OUtCQ10rA0WfIOaRC7mFLt2sXKw2rltZXsw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1f19:: with SMTP id bd25mr6882280wmb.75.1636625695563; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 02:14:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.132] (p4ff23ee8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.242.62.232]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v185sm8498685wme.35.2021.11.11.02.14.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 02:14:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <31f51c84-c7f9-8251-39a8-3ff38496ae5e@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:14:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2] s390x: fixing I/O memory allocation Content-Language: en-US To: Pierre Morel , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: frankja@linux.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com References: <20211111100153.86088-1-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <20211111100153.86088-1-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 11.11.21 11:01, Pierre Morel wrote: > The allocator allocate pages it follows the size must be rounded > to pages before the allocation. > > Fixes: b0fe3988 "s390x: define UV compatible I/O allocation" > What's the symptom of this? A failing test? Or is this just a pro-activ fix? -- Thanks, David / dhildenb