From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
peterx@redhat.com, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] userfaultfd/selftests: Remove the time() check on delayed uffd
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2021 19:45:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210310004511.51996-3-peterx@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210310004511.51996-1-peterx@redhat.com>
There seems to have no guarantee that time() will return the same for the two
calls even if there's no delay, e.g. when a fault is accidentally crossing the
changing of a second. Meanwhile, this message is also not helping that much
since delay could happen with a lot of reasons, e.g., schedule latency of
resolving thread. It may not mean an issue with uffd.
Neither do I saw this error triggered either in the past runs. Even if it
triggers, it'll be drown in all the rest of test logs. Remove it.
Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 8 --------
1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
index 6dab8ef034a0..5cde062f07bc 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
@@ -568,7 +568,6 @@ static void *locking_thread(void *arg)
unsigned long long count;
char randstate[64];
unsigned int seed;
- time_t start;
if (bounces & BOUNCE_RANDOM) {
seed = (unsigned int) time(NULL) - bounces;
@@ -605,7 +604,6 @@ static void *locking_thread(void *arg)
page_nr += 1;
page_nr %= nr_pages;
- start = time(NULL);
if (bounces & BOUNCE_VERIFY) {
count = *area_count(area_dst, page_nr);
if (!count) {
@@ -668,12 +666,6 @@ static void *locking_thread(void *arg)
count++;
*area_count(area_dst, page_nr) = count_verify[page_nr] = count;
pthread_mutex_unlock(area_mutex(area_dst, page_nr));
-
- if (time(NULL) - start > 1)
- fprintf(stderr,
- "userfault too slow %ld "
- "possible false positive with overcommit\n",
- time(NULL) - start);
}
return NULL;
--
2.26.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-10 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-10 0:45 [PATCH 0/5] userfaultfd/selftests: A few cleanups Peter Xu
2021-03-10 0:45 ` [PATCH 1/5] userfaultfd/selftests: Use user mode only Peter Xu
2021-03-10 0:45 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2021-03-10 0:45 ` [PATCH 3/5] userfaultfd/selftests: Dropping VERIFY check in locking_thread Peter Xu
2021-03-10 0:45 ` [PATCH 4/5] userfaultfd/selftests: Only dump counts if mode enabled Peter Xu
2021-03-10 0:45 ` [PATCH 5/5] userfaultfd/selftests: Unify error handling Peter Xu
2021-03-10 21:26 ` [PATCH 0/5] userfaultfd/selftests: A few cleanups Axel Rasmussen
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=20210310004511.51996-3-peterx@redhat.com \
--to=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
/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: link
Be 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).