From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Aruna Ramakrishna <aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Keith Lucas <keith.lucas@oracle.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] selftests/mm: Fix UFFDIO_API usage with proper two-step feature negotiation
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 17:17:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4bea7e61-b9d6-4855-bbdf-489020c9167a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250624042411.395285-1-liwang@redhat.com>
On 24.06.25 06:24, Li Wang wrote:
> The current implementation of test_unmerge_uffd_wp() explicitly sets
> `uffdio_api.features = UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP` before calling
> UFFDIO_API. This can cause the ioctl() call to fail with EINVAL on kernels
> that do not support UFFD-WP, leading the test to fail unnecessarily:
>
> # ------------------------------
> # running ./ksm_functional_tests
> # ------------------------------
> # TAP version 13
> # 1..9
> # # [RUN] test_unmerge
> # ok 1 Pages were unmerged
> # # [RUN] test_unmerge_zero_pages
> # ok 2 KSM zero pages were unmerged
> # # [RUN] test_unmerge_discarded
> # ok 3 Pages were unmerged
> # # [RUN] test_unmerge_uffd_wp
> # not ok 4 UFFDIO_API failed <-----
> # # [RUN] test_prot_none
> # ok 5 Pages were unmerged
> # # [RUN] test_prctl
> # ok 6 Setting/clearing PR_SET_MEMORY_MERGE works
> # # [RUN] test_prctl_fork
> # # No pages got merged
> # # [RUN] test_prctl_fork_exec
> # ok 7 PR_SET_MEMORY_MERGE value is inherited
> # # [RUN] test_prctl_unmerge
> # ok 8 Pages were unmerged
> # Bail out! 1 out of 8 tests failed
> # # Planned tests != run tests (9 != 8)
> # # Totals: pass:7 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
> # [FAIL]
>
> This patch improves compatibility and robustness of the UFFD-WP test
> (test_unmerge_uffd_wp) by correctly implementing the UFFDIO_API
> two-step handshake as recommended by the userfaultfd(2) man page.
>
> Key changes:
>
> 1. Use features=0 in the initial UFFDIO_API call to query supported
> feature bits, rather than immediately requesting WP support.
>
> 2. Skip the test gracefully if:
> - UFFDIO_API fails with EINVAL (e.g. unsupported API version), or
> - UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP is not advertised by the kernel.
>
> 3. Close the initial userfaultfd and create a new one before enabling
> the required feature, since UFFDIO_API can only be called once per fd.
>
> 4. Improve diagnostics by distinguishing between expected and unexpected
> failures, using strerror() to report errors.
>
> This ensures the test behaves correctly across a wider range of kernel
> versions and configurations, while preserving the intended behavior on
> kernels that support UFFD-WP.
>
> Suggestted-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>
> Cc: Aruna Ramakrishna <aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com>
> Cc: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Keith Lucas <keith.lucas@oracle.com>
> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> v1 --> v2:
> * Close the original userfaultfd and open a new one before enabling features
> * Reworked UFFDIO_API negotiation to follow the official two-step handshake
>
> .../selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
> index b61803e36d1c..19e5b741893a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
> @@ -393,9 +393,13 @@ static void test_unmerge_uffd_wp(void)
>
> /* See if UFFD-WP is around. */
> uffdio_api.api = UFFD_API;
> - uffdio_api.features = UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP;
> + uffdio_api.features = 0;
> if (ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_API, &uffdio_api) < 0) {
> - ksft_test_result_fail("UFFDIO_API failed\n");
> + if (errno == EINVAL)
> + ksft_test_result_skip("The API version requested is not supported\n");
> + else
> + ksft_test_result_fail("UFFDIO_API failed: %s\n", strerror(errno));
> +
> goto close_uffd;
> }
> if (!(uffdio_api.features & UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP)) {
> @@ -403,6 +407,26 @@ static void test_unmerge_uffd_wp(void)
> goto close_uffd;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * UFFDIO_API must only be called once to enable features.
> + * So we close the old userfaultfd and create a new one to
> + * actually enable UFFD_FEATURE_PAGEFAULT_FLAG_WP.
> + */
> + close(uffd);
> + uffd = syscall(__NR_userfaultfd, O_CLOEXEC | O_NONBLOCK);
> + if (uffd < 0) {
> + ksft_test_result_skip("__NR_userfaultfd failed\n");
If it now suddenly fails (after it working above), this sure is a fail,
right?
Apart from that
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-24 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-22 8:10 [PATCH] mm/selftests: improve UFFD-WP feature detection in KSM test Li Wang
2025-06-23 8:33 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 3:43 ` Li Wang
2025-06-24 4:24 ` [PATCH v2] selftests/mm: Fix UFFDIO_API usage with proper two-step feature negotiation Li Wang
2025-06-24 8:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 8:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 11:29 ` Nadav Amit
2025-06-24 11:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 11:48 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 15:03 ` Peter Xu
2025-06-24 15:17 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-24 15:17 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-06-25 0:34 ` Li Wang
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=4bea7e61-b9d6-4855-bbdf-489020c9167a@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com \
--cc=bagasdotme@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=keith.lucas@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liwang@redhat.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.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