mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang, Shaoqin" <shaoqin.huang@intel.com>
To: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] memblock tests: update tests to check if memblock_alloc zeroed memory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 10:24:42 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cfdf337a-96dd-e0f8-89f9-1339c5a2579b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220816021522.GA3590@sophie>



On 8/16/2022 10:15 AM, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 04:50:51PM +0800, Huang, Shaoqin wrote:
>> Hi, Rebecca.
>>
>> On 8/14/2022 1:53 PM, Rebecca Mckeever wrote:
>>> Add an assert in memblock_alloc() tests where allocation is expected to
>>> occur. The assert checks whether the entire chunk of allocated memory is
>>> cleared.
>>>
>>> The current memblock_alloc() tests do not check whether the allocated
>>> memory was zeroed. memblock_alloc() should zero the allocated memory since
>>> it is a wrapper for memblock_alloc_try_nid().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rebecca Mckeever <remckee0@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c    |  7 +++++++
>>>    tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h    | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>    3 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> index a14f38eb8a89..71c89cb9b2a8 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/alloc_api.c
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ static int alloc_top_down_simple_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, expected_start);
>>> @@ -80,6 +82,8 @@ static int alloc_top_down_disjoint_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->size, r1.size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->base, r1.base);
>>> @@ -125,6 +129,8 @@ static int alloc_top_down_before_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_end_of_DRAM() - total_size);
>>> @@ -173,6 +179,8 @@ static int alloc_top_down_after_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base - r2_size);
>>> @@ -223,6 +231,8 @@ static int alloc_top_down_second_fit_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, r2.size + r3_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r2.base - r3_size);
>>> @@ -277,6 +287,8 @@ static int alloc_in_between_generic_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base - r2.size - r3_size);
>>> @@ -418,6 +430,8 @@ static int alloc_limited_space_generic_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(available_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, available_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, MEM_SIZE);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
>>> @@ -442,6 +456,7 @@ static int alloc_no_memory_generic_check(void)
>>>    	PREFIX_PUSH();
>>>    	reset_memblock_regions();
>>> +	fill_memblock();
>>
>> Maybe we don't need this line, it has no effect at here. Anyway, Others
>> Looks Good to me.
>>
> Do you mean that it's not necessary since the test doesn't run
> verify_mem_content()?
> 

Yes. And the test function name is alloc_no_memory_...(). So I just 
think no memory operation in it may be same with the function name.

>> Reviewed-by: Shaoqin Huang <shaoqin.huang@intel.com>
>>
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_1K, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>> @@ -472,6 +487,8 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_simple_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(SZ_2, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, SZ_2);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, SZ_2);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
>>> @@ -528,6 +545,7 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_disjoint_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, alignment);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->size, r1.size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn1->base, r1.base);
>>> @@ -571,6 +589,8 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_before_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r1_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r1_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, memblock_start_of_DRAM());
>>> @@ -618,6 +638,8 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_after_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r2_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r2_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, total_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r1.base);
>>> @@ -669,6 +691,8 @@ static int alloc_bottom_up_second_fit_check(void)
>>>    	allocated_ptr = memblock_alloc(r3_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>>>    	ASSERT_NE(allocated_ptr, NULL);
>>> +	ASSERT_MEM_EQ((char *)allocated_ptr, 0, r3_size);
>>> +
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->size, r2.size + r3_size);
>>>    	ASSERT_EQ(rgn->base, r2.base);
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
>>> index 76a8ad818f3a..0ca26fe12c38 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c
>>> @@ -60,16 +60,23 @@ void reset_memblock_attributes(void)
>>>    	memblock.current_limit	= MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE;
>>>    }
>>> +void fill_memblock(void)
>>> +{
>>> +	memset(memory_block.base, 1, MEM_SIZE);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>    void setup_memblock(void)
>>>    {
>>>    	reset_memblock_regions();
>>>    	memblock_add((phys_addr_t)memory_block.base, MEM_SIZE);
>>> +	fill_memblock();
>>>    }
>>>    void dummy_physical_memory_init(void)
>>>    {
>>>    	memory_block.base = malloc(MEM_SIZE);
>>>    	assert(memory_block.base);
>>> +	fill_memblock();
>>>    }
>>>    void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void)
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> index d396e5423a8e..7a16a7dc8f2c 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h
>>> @@ -51,6 +51,18 @@
>>>    	assert((_expected) < (_seen)); \
>>>    } while (0)
>>> +/**
>>> + * ASSERT_MEM_EQ():
>>> + * Check that the first @_size bytes of @_seen are all equal to @_expected.
>>> + * If false, print failed test message (if running with --verbose) and then
>>> + * assert.
>>> + */
>>> +#define ASSERT_MEM_EQ(_seen, _expected, _size) do { \
>>> +	for (int _i = 0; _i < (_size); _i++) { \
>>> +		ASSERT_EQ((_seen)[_i], (_expected)); \
>>> +	} \
>>> +} while (0)
>>> +
>>>    #define PREFIX_PUSH() prefix_push(__func__)
>>>    /*
>>> @@ -70,6 +82,7 @@ struct region {
>>>    void reset_memblock_regions(void);
>>>    void reset_memblock_attributes(void);
>>> +void fill_memblock(void);
>>>    void setup_memblock(void);
>>>    void dummy_physical_memory_init(void);
>>>    void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void);

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-16  7:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-14  5:53 [PATCH 0/8] memblock tests: update and extend memblock simulator Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 1/8] memblock tests: update tests to check if memblock_alloc zeroed memory Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-15  8:50   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-16  2:15     ` Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-16  2:24       ` Huang, Shaoqin [this message]
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 2/8] memblock tests: update zeroed memory check for memblock_alloc_* tests Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-15  8:59   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 3/8] memblock tests: add labels to verbose output for generic alloc tests Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-15  9:15   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-16  2:39     ` Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-16  3:08       ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-19  5:03         ` Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-19  8:39           ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 4/8] memblock tests: add additional tests for basic api and memblock_alloc Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-15 10:19   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-19  6:10     ` Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 5/8] memblock tests: update alloc_api to test memblock_alloc_raw Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 6/8] memblock tests: update alloc_nid_api to test memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-16  1:24   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-19  6:22     ` Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-14  5:53 ` [PATCH 7/8] memblock tests: add tests for memblock_*bottom_up functions Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-16  1:46   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-14  5:54 ` [PATCH 8/8] memblock tests: add tests for memblock_trim_memory Rebecca Mckeever
2022-08-16  1:46   ` Huang, Shaoqin
2022-08-20  8:40     ` Rebecca Mckeever

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=cfdf337a-96dd-e0f8-89f9-1339c5a2579b@intel.com \
    --to=shaoqin.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=remckee0@gmail.com \
    --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

Powered by JetHome