From: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] memblock tests: add range tests for memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 23:19:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221011041910.GA7782@sophie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b44eee1a-0d61-f5bb-7b0c-a01f13a0b297@redhat.com>
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 01:16:03PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 03.10.22 01:41, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> > Add tests for memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw() that are very similar to
> > the range tests for memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/memblock/Makefile | 2 +-
> > tools/testing/memblock/main.c | 2 +
> > .../memblock/tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.c | 1208 +++++++++++++++++
> > .../memblock/tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.h | 9 +
> > 4 files changed, 1220 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.c
> > create mode 100644 tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.h
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/Makefile b/tools/testing/memblock/Makefile
> > index 246f7ac8489b..2310ac4d080e 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/Makefile
> > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/Makefile
> > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ CFLAGS += -I. -I../../include -Wall -O2 -fsanitize=address \
> > LDFLAGS += -fsanitize=address -fsanitize=undefined
> > TARGETS = main
> > TEST_OFILES = tests/alloc_nid_api.o tests/alloc_helpers_api.o tests/alloc_api.o \
> > - tests/basic_api.o tests/common.o
> > + tests/basic_api.o tests/common.o tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.o
> > DEP_OFILES = memblock.o lib/slab.o mmzone.o slab.o
> > OFILES = main.o $(DEP_OFILES) $(TEST_OFILES)
> > EXTR_SRC = ../../../mm/memblock.c
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/main.c b/tools/testing/memblock/main.c
> > index 4ca1024342b1..278f9dec5008 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/main.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/main.c
> > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > #include "tests/alloc_api.h"
> > #include "tests/alloc_helpers_api.h"
> > #include "tests/alloc_nid_api.h"
> > +#include "tests/alloc_exact_nid_api.h"
> > #include "tests/common.h"
> > int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > @@ -12,6 +13,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > memblock_alloc_checks();
> > memblock_alloc_helpers_checks();
> > memblock_alloc_nid_checks();
> > + memblock_alloc_exact_nid_checks();
> > return 0;
> > }
>
>
> memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw(NUMA_NO_NODE) behaves exactly the way
> memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(NUMA_NO_NODE) behaves -- which is essentially
> memblock_alloc_raw().
>
> So do we really need a separate set of tests for these?
>
Instead of a separate set of tests, I could add a flag for
memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw() to test_flags so that the range tests in
alloc_nid_api.c could be run with that flag. Do you think I should do
that, or omit tests for memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw(NUMA_NO_NODE)
altogether?
> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
Thanks,
Rebecca
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-11 4:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-02 23:41 [PATCH v2 0/5] memblock tests: add tests for memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-02 23:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] memblock tests: add range " Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-10 11:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-10-11 4:19 ` Rebecca Mckeever [this message]
2022-10-11 9:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-10-02 23:41 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] memblock tests: add top-down NUMA " Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-02 23:41 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] memblock tests: add bottom-up " Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-02 23:41 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] memblock tests: add generic " Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-02 23:41 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] memblock tests: remove completed TODO item Rebecca Mckeever
2022-10-10 9:07 ` David Hildenbrand
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=20221011041910.GA7782@sophie \
--to=remckee0@gmail.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rppt@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: 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).