From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout-p-103.mailbox.org (mout-p-103.mailbox.org [80.241.56.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B79CC1CD25; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 15:01:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.161 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724684514; cv=none; b=LLBS+AFzf4qgEEbCZIEjh4buds0peSJJ8MsM7mjB9kD/FzD9cF8nGyL7XrFr9kmMUM7ztUC6N/zqOyeeNceGDv7BZ/KHkRS6/zI/aMdMBEV1Ixp61+crwAKOHAHf0qQSKoPPbTCM1UzAYMtkHaeBH0QPVO7qrjbZG6kzLiiqlMA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724684514; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jSgjWvvQD8+edtmVB9c/uNcLn+pooqKkSJVmKNPbAt8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ohcs4byLjhu6uNeH7gWoFIf6XDptx6ib5GuAfovEnjB8PanHpAdGxnb/l0u5OCJ00OxL3ZgGretXk3xXTA7FhFrxTOqrLVsgiA3MIjZwMcEvcPc2AxDJUO8K7JDDr7eI+kWaXVR+KifiPtLZAsTVjVaKzSCLfdzdZ6K+AdQdK+U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=pankajraghav.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pankajraghav.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pankajraghav.com header.i=@pankajraghav.com header.b=VkXBgwvi; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.161 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=pankajraghav.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pankajraghav.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pankajraghav.com header.i=@pankajraghav.com header.b="VkXBgwvi" Received: from smtp202.mailbox.org (smtp202.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:b231:465::202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-103.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Wsv5g1cLsz9svW; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 17:01:43 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pankajraghav.com; s=MBO0001; t=1724684503; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=5yXLWDQCZ5TK80/zWFIY2TSxF4QwKlkw5RXpKLYOLgM=; b=VkXBgwvizjFv4gZcT25+rPkj6gmAtxLp9+dGtSIvUOs1NoI3Ea84US7yl7RS/exadB9d68 wHeXj+UUQhGFzkVW1xW7Q+utTSuxkm8imagvFVFOuWPwypxlH8S1ASL9g7SeID6ePFzG/G +nlxzhHZGezrnPmFBawnhAjukn7+/5kgoVyfDEnDe/e3dVlf9YjBmGwrS9wFfbyfy+n64w It3bMogpdAyYK3D5i1eHg5soC8YsGKp9NxBJgITLRI4za36o5ss4Wl9mtkY2mEsJCFyqP8 cN9shsFq8hvV2pX4bCO2G8SyJa6B4Tef2IadQUW5ReMnrWhXdXc23TIW2+KtYg== Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 15:01:38 +0000 From: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" To: Zi Yan Cc: Shuah Khan , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Pankaj Raghav Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/mm: do not try to split below filesystem block size Message-ID: <20240826150138.xi3jmtylcej2m6ff@quentin> References: <20240826145344.33665-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com> <340DCD7C-8456-4F5B-B503-9DF5903C16DA@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <340DCD7C-8456-4F5B-B503-9DF5903C16DA@nvidia.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Wsv5g1cLsz9svW On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 10:59:16AM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > On 26 Aug 2024, at 10:53, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > > > From: Pankaj Raghav > > > > There is no point trying to split pagecache thp below the blocksize of > > the filesystem as that is the minimum order that pagecache needs to > > maintain to support blocksizes greater than pagesize [1]. > > But the purpose of the tests is to make sure all cases are properly handled, > right? If we do not test splitting pagecache large folio below the > block size, we will never know if a kernel change breaks the handling. > > Just my two cents. That is a fair point. Let's ignore this patch then :) > > > > > Set the lower limit for the splitting order to be the fs blocksize > > order. > > > > As the number of tests will now depend on the minimum splitting order, > > move the file preparation before calling ksft_set_plan(). > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20240822135018.1931258-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav > > --- > > .../selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c | 19 +++++++++++++------ > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > -- > Best Regards, > Yan, Zi -- Pankaj Raghav