From: gorcunov at gmail.com (Cyrill Gorcunov) Subject: [PATCH] proc: fixup map_files test on arm Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 18:55:59 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20181112155559.GV13195@uranus.lan> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181112141456.GA15690@avx2> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 05:14:57PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: ... > > > int main(void) > > > { > > > const unsigned int PAGE_SIZE = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE); > > > +#ifdef __arm__ > > > + unsigned long va = 2 * PAGE_SIZE; > > > +#else > > > + unsigned long va = 0; > > > +#endif ... > > > > I have sent a patch removing proc-self-map-files-002 AND making 001 to use as a > > HINT for mmap (MAP_FIXED) *at least* *(2 * PAGE_SIZE), which would, likely, > > attend all architectures, avoiding trying to make the test specific to one, > > and, still, test the symlinks for issues (like bad chars, spaces, so on). > > If the goal is to test the lowest address then going for 2*PAGE_SIZE is > a mistake. > > Which BTW hints to add a test for the highest address. > > > Both tests (001 and 002) have pretty much the same code, while they could have 2 > > tests in a single code, using kselftest framework. Is NULL hint + MAP_FIXED > > something imperative for this test ? Why not to have all in a single test ? > > I dislike tests which lump everything together into one process. > > > Are you keeping the NULL hint just to test mmap, apart" from the core of > > this test ? Guys, lets simply stick with Alexey's patch. I personnally think that testing mappings should be a separate test in vm/, but seriously this took too long already :) If Alexey's patch fixes the problem with arm I think we're fine.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gorcunov@gmail.com (Cyrill Gorcunov) Subject: [PATCH] proc: fixup map_files test on arm Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 18:55:59 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20181112155559.GV13195@uranus.lan> (raw) Message-ID: <20181112155559.UTtP6X6FikMRHeeyH-mL19ovvyCgtcBjEq_vUBQY1mI@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181112141456.GA15690@avx2> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018@05:14:57PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: ... > > > int main(void) > > > { > > > const unsigned int PAGE_SIZE = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE); > > > +#ifdef __arm__ > > > + unsigned long va = 2 * PAGE_SIZE; > > > +#else > > > + unsigned long va = 0; > > > +#endif ... > > > > I have sent a patch removing proc-self-map-files-002 AND making 001 to use as a > > HINT for mmap (MAP_FIXED) *at least* *(2 * PAGE_SIZE), which would, likely, > > attend all architectures, avoiding trying to make the test specific to one, > > and, still, test the symlinks for issues (like bad chars, spaces, so on). > > If the goal is to test the lowest address then going for 2*PAGE_SIZE is > a mistake. > > Which BTW hints to add a test for the highest address. > > > Both tests (001 and 002) have pretty much the same code, while they could have 2 > > tests in a single code, using kselftest framework. Is NULL hint + MAP_FIXED > > something imperative for this test ? Why not to have all in a single test ? > > I dislike tests which lump everything together into one process. > > > Are you keeping the NULL hint just to test mmap, apart" from the core of > > this test ? Guys, lets simply stick with Alexey's patch. I personnally think that testing mappings should be a separate test in vm/, but seriously this took too long already :) If Alexey's patch fixes the problem with arm I think we're fine.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-12 15:55 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <20181110184920.GA18252@avx2> 2018-11-11 2:48 ` [PATCH] proc: fixup map_files test on arm rafael.tinoco 2018-11-11 2:48 ` Rafael David Tinoco 2018-11-12 14:14 ` adobriyan 2018-11-12 14:14 ` Alexey Dobriyan 2018-11-12 15:55 ` gorcunov [this message] 2018-11-12 15:55 ` Cyrill Gorcunov 2018-11-12 16:35 ` rafael.tinoco 2018-11-12 16:35 ` Rafael David Tinoco 2018-11-13 16:54 ` [PATCH v2] " adobriyan 2018-11-13 16:54 ` Alexey Dobriyan 2018-11-13 17:01 ` gorcunov 2018-11-13 17:01 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20181112155559.GV13195@uranus.lan \ --to=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).