From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 713894BA1D8; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 12:43:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790858584; cv=none; b=BkWuEZGgCaloCyTHnXQxA4+WK/Q9bbHgfOLvooXAVZTCLebtkRjL+kKyAg/9jT0h4einZ06RKIAMx/opTIs7Ony+LCOp5p3u43bmj5UDnt37mZL7CksVBbGn6VXcGHNPNvQveNU9b5UZO11R3Kf48+BX7qDpIPaQSD0d9ayWljg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790858584; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qvewlw/Btz4CWYKXaWo7kc/e0lrDVpSgqkNIen4sfq4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uv4x7/qc+NEk4L7Y35luz16jue1GVAjK640nF4M41FeYFUMUtLASSYNTgcltt9GJLuizeFjrCk8bhwBusnGROnx3dnc9ZyKZQonfl1T6QIDuRN6fodBXEAqTb6aD7n4WScPjXHIYEy7q88zSGaN79yNhKVY+30VMfWokBIlzkMM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=qjY3z5xS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="qjY3z5xS" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67165497; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 05:42:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.164.19.84] (a081061.arm.com [10.164.19.84]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C09393F85F; Thu, 1 Oct 2026 05:42:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1790858581; bh=qvewlw/Btz4CWYKXaWo7kc/e0lrDVpSgqkNIen4sfq4=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=qjY3z5xSIVBzLjhjRFSAaxKTdMPP9C3kr+4Wkak6jqEWyQRyjgcztYf3mpofcS3Ru R1clqJGcAJxIcFoQj8TB6EEfEPlDJy3h4j7P70y0kHvoQdyaKq87Vi5Er6Fwxyl4HI Adiung6RyI60Ndt0Ujgzld7AZQBrqwEQOK7NnZSs= Message-ID: <59c330ba-211f-46d9-902f-59ca5f0f8120@arm.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 18:12:55 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 4/9] selftests/mm: mremap_test: correct multiple VMA range size To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" , Andrew Morton Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R . Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Shuah Khan , John Hubbard , Kalesh Singh , Anshuman Khandual , Park Tae-sun , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260924050009.19974-1-sarthak.sharma@arm.com> <20260924050009.19974-5-sarthak.sharma@arm.com> <3d13be9d-a4c9-4123-a047-67371fa4586e@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Sarthak Sharma In-Reply-To: <3d13be9d-a4c9-4123-a047-67371fa4586e@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi David! On 10/1/26 5:24 PM, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > On 9/24/26 07:00, Sarthak Sharma wrote: >> In the test mremap_move_multiple_vmas(), pages 4 >> to 6 form a single VMA. But the helper function >> is_multiple_vma_range_ok() checks pages 4 and 5 as >> one range and treats page 6 separately. >> >> Check all three pages as a single range and skip >> the page 6 iteration to match the actual VMA layout. >> >> Fixes: d53f248258e1 ("tools/testing/selftests: extend mremap_test to test multi-VMA mremap") >> Signed-off-by: Sarthak Sharma >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c >> index ba9b7f7566d0..869df22d46db 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c >> @@ -373,7 +373,10 @@ static bool is_multiple_vma_range_ok(unsigned int pattern_seed, >> for (i = 0; i <= 10; i += 2) { >> int j; >> char *buf = &ptr[i * page_size]; >> - size_t size = i == 4 ? 2 * page_size : page_size; >> + size_t size = i == 4 ? 3 * page_size : page_size; >> + >> + if (i == 6) >> + continue; >> >> for (j = 0; j < size; j++) { >> char chr = rand(); > > What is the impact of this that it warrants a Fixes? Will the test fail? I read through this again, and realized it is just populating and validating parts of one VMA in two iterations, which is not wrong, just a bit odd since others VMAs were being validated in one go. I think I'd gotten confused with the layout and pictured something else :). So you're right, this doesn't require a Fixes tag. Infact I think I'll drop this patch altogether since it is validating stuff correctly.