From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] userfaultfd/selftests: clean up hugetlb allocation code
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 15:56:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220105155613.45d7dcb81e19bd42deefab79@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHvVci5sSC-1TEiCBKe8uKQ=0uwCsoBJT_fsG1Rfq6ffy6Obg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 14:35:34 -0800 Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:17 PM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > The message for commit f5c73297181c ("userfaultfd/selftests: fix hugetlb
> > area allocations") says there is no need to create a hugetlb file in the
> > non-shared testing case. However, the commit did not actually change
> > the code to prevent creation of the file.
> >
> > While it is technically true that there is no need to create and use a
> > hugetlb file in the case of non-shared-testing, it is useful. This is
> > because 'hole punching' of a hugetlb file has the potentially incorrect
> > side effect of also removing pages from private mappings. The
> > userfaultfd test relies on this side effect for removing pages from the
> > destination buffer during rounds of stress testing.
> >
> > Remove the incomplete code that was added to deal with no hugetlb file.
> > Just keep the code that prevents reserves from being created for the
> > destination area.
> >
> > *alloc_area = mmap(NULL, nr_pages * page_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> > - map_shared ? MAP_SHARED :
> > - MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_HUGETLB |
> > + (map_shared ? MAP_SHARED : MAP_PRIVATE) |
> > + MAP_HUGETLB |
> > (*alloc_area == area_src ? 0 : MAP_NORESERVE),
> > - huge_fd,
> > - *alloc_area == area_src ? 0 : nr_pages * page_size);
> > + huge_fd, *alloc_area == area_src ? 0 :
> > + nr_pages * page_size);
>
> Sorry to nitpick, but I think it was slightly more readable when the
> ternary was all on one line.
When you have that many arguments I think it's clearer to put one per
line, viz.
*alloc_area = mmap(NULL,
nr_pages * page_size,
PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
(map_shared ? MAP_SHARED : MAP_PRIVATE) |
MAP_HUGETLB |
(*alloc_area == area_src ? 0 : MAP_NORESERVE),
huge_fd,
*alloc_area == area_src ? 0 : nr_pages * page_size);
But whatever...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-05 23:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-04 2:17 Mike Kravetz
2022-01-04 22:35 ` Axel Rasmussen
2022-01-05 0:24 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-01-05 23:56 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2022-01-06 17:43 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-01-06 18:25 ` Axel Rasmussen
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=20220105155613.45d7dcb81e19bd42deefab79@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=almasrymina@google.com \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@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