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=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no 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 9BBACC35249 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5657320732 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 23:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="kiJFgYh6" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727148AbgBCXTH (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:19:07 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f65.google.com ([209.85.210.65]:36126 "EHLO mail-ot1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726287AbgBCXTH (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:19:07 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f65.google.com with SMTP id j20so6912820otq.3 for ; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 15:19:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JZG+WtSGQs6QhG818eTrKWkOuEkoqiXKe+iz1pu4uMw=; b=kiJFgYh6yNJ0L2ecPXo+0jXN+6U8xrb9JtkyYqy3sE8LUhPMl5p9RBaffqUCdGGebE LV+1NURfNHCoklIRGG5UNpDL9JKrjRsBcDgdIU3Iy/5OBH0RAIagWOKEuawsfHnf+6Mn s/jyyzcRMDOKwGgOLBGycQM/xhhQapE69IRjL5t9dVaxVA4H4X/DSJWWMUV00IWeo6/n UmoAq69ILXgEvKgYpWH2xqUdIJkUvgeG30WzbMVUAt5FG9mvhFfM9KfAG1lmqVurAUfI lW5YiBxG4Bah8vesGavRLFwf9pBAk2vCpClJHZs2LMQlSNGHpYa9ZepQ1UvIUxR/Yxsz lNrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JZG+WtSGQs6QhG818eTrKWkOuEkoqiXKe+iz1pu4uMw=; b=TN+mropuGksZvSIY6D0uaHhp8Zy27PtWg1IVrm3es5wfrkdIG4HNlZGzPzMkiG6sH0 2dunxvUeX+eptpEuLb6Ydque3oVikr+Uv4+QyVzQ0MBMj8iMzBkeSyByE81zfnB8NPwz Of4SkmfgRz4IBmBNTegOr1vm9KAldoT3aIrBoiI7l2zj2jXx8ZfkyCINYMYnHliSNfyL Ps/ruz1lpJ3DxhOnuIgTu/U0jzTeXXML3UtLJ/YBtWEvWnOArxQvtVC0PAzmkoZ/0P83 bdDMKYL9sSyKGezMaIvquhJIi3p+WSv6TjuALMuEdFswL+vhhdboG3CyuhOSqcIQTPSa gZgg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXXV+avyS9abflULdjIkUcgouTL1r7ECnqpQw2RT3Hxi5oCstHT hdhiGYiDJl3RLIUbCSHXoxjyrL0MSm2IQaVlnfa7Kw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwaAdLyjwn98pa+6a96VcAqNjbWTndQSAHzQhZDsrfJdeG21nIO+WKsmdVQsFSjR17QNJNgzKBxSy1spQxw+A4= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2028:: with SMTP id n37mr20463716ota.127.1580771945917; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 15:19:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200115012651.228058-1-almasrymina@google.com> <20200115012651.228058-7-almasrymina@google.com> <7ce6d59f-fd73-c529-2ad6-edda9937966d@linux.ibm.com> <98c83a41-b864-5950-488c-443f6ef60b91@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <98c83a41-b864-5950-488c-443f6ef60b91@linux.ibm.com> From: Mina Almasry Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 15:18:55 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 7/8] hugetlb_cgroup: Add hugetlb_cgroup reservation tests To: Sandipan Das Cc: David Rientjes , Mike Kravetz , Shakeel Butt , shuah , Greg Thelen , Andrew Morton , open list , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Aneesh Kumar 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 Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:11 PM Sandipan Das wrote: > > Hi David, > > On 30/01/20 2:30 am, David Rientjes wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2020, Sandipan Das wrote: > > > >> For powerpc64, either 16MB/16GB or 2MB/1GB huge pages are supported depending > >> on the MMU type (Hash or Radix). I was just running these tests on a powerpc64 > >> system with Hash MMU and ran into problems because the tests assume that the > >> hugepage size is always 2MB. Can you determine the huge page size at runtime? > >> > > > > I assume this is only testing failures of the tools/testing/selftests > > additions that hardcode 2MB paths and not a kernel problem? In other > > words, you can still boot, reserve, alloc, and free hugetlb pages on ppc > > after this patchset without using the selftests? > > > > Yes, its just the hardcoded paths. I didn't run into any kernel problems. > Sandipan, I updated the tests to not assume 2MB page size, but I'm having trouble getting a setup with a non-2MB default size to test with. I'm uploading v11 of the series shortly, please let me know if the problem persists. > - Sandipan >