From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 DAF6533B96A; Tue, 20 Jan 2026 17:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768929775; cv=none; b=SMvNB+b9am3l4fo5WvPhXlfR4NCrivXUSMI2rHYXMBl0sc6egFqDdGL9P77UxWvy2K6VNcQXR0nQraV4SobxPoFbJFWtd2GvKS5BI40oromEpt2o6EMe68dMnSAwkF2EFGtGiaXqra4J6mIr7QSSfFRKzxPEtH18mCO+tZm6LPA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768929775; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+PpQhlnYOghCS9FQdpea1dqa5DXErdHY+bL/BwEjMXw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=gR1i/BAfGyw6g/wfredhZoLmO/uWKkLyZ29/5qXoiaq/Zu0CONmGzNXtHOcVZinQgRs/mNCJPAnSbj6acZ25uLyXEuQT7P4S7FsUFN0mdvHubsjxaXOTlvHZCp20kRJet76fxYQog2xdEQruCBREtLsm2Zlb2XL2UPXFi9vp4Kk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=s8lvO7fL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="s8lvO7fL" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E111C16AAE; Tue, 20 Jan 2026 17:22:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1768929773; bh=+PpQhlnYOghCS9FQdpea1dqa5DXErdHY+bL/BwEjMXw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=s8lvO7fLdDgmuSM7nWDJ+1STjiJK4yz0QTXDWDsnC60f57BOxkn1aV8PUyyd5tGJv CpAdZzrrFM1+UaaGDgyfYAsCdjuC6mXplHGhDQyBJpXj/zJLdQSmuTBoh6XNq+clD7 itFs77aewVdoUUl2AggxsHzWejrcHv5vSI5/BXM0= Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 09:22:52 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Mark Brown Cc: David Hildenbrand , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R. Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Shuah Khan , Jason Gunthorpe , Leon Romanovsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/mm: Have the harness run each test category separately Message-Id: <20260120092252.8597a496ed1cdebe5e120fb6@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20260120-selftests-mm-run-suites-separately-v1-1-a4334f0cbb3a@kernel.org> References: <20260120-selftests-mm-run-suites-separately-v1-1-a4334f0cbb3a@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 13:25:32 +0000 Mark Brown wrote: > At present the mm selftests are integrated into the kselftest harness by > having it run run_vmtest.sh and letting it pick it's default set of > tests to invoke, rather than by telling the kselftest framework about > each test program individually as is more standard. This has some > unfortunate interactions with the kselftest harness: > > - If any of the tests hangs the harness will kill the entire mm > selftests run rather than just the individual test, meaning no > further tests get run. > - The timeout applied by the harness is applied to the whole run rather > than an individual test which frequently leads to the suite not being > completed in production testing. > > Deploy a crude but effective mitigation for these issues by telling the > kselftest framework to run each of the test categories that run_vmtests.sh > has separately. Since kselftest really wants to run test programs this > is done by providing a trivial wrapper script for each categorty that > invokes run_vmtest.sh, this is not a thing of great elegence but it is > clear and simple. Since run_vmtests.sh is doing runtime support > detection, scenario enumeration and setup for many of the tests we can't > consistently tell the framework about the individual test programs. > > This has the side effect of reordering the tests, hopefully the testing > is not overly sensitive to this. Thanks, let's see what people think. What happens with tests which are newly added but which don't integrate into this new framework? eg, https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20260120123239.909882-2-linmiaohe@huawei.com