Re: [PATCH 0/8] Some cleanups for memory-failure

[Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>]

On 2024/3/1 20:40, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> On 3/1/24 11:28 AM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2024/3/1 5:20, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
>>> This isn't my complete collection of patches to memory-failure, but
>>> they're the ones I have the most confidence in.  I haven't done any real
>>> testing of this beyond compiling & running on a system without trying to
>>> do any memory failure injections.  Is there a good test-suite I should
>>> run before submitting these kinds of patches?
>>
>> mm_regression[1] should be a good alternative test-suite to run. It's written by
>> Naoya Horiguchi and available at https://github.com/nhoriguchi/mm_regression.
> Any idea why these tests haven't been added to selftests or ltp?

I would try to add some of them to selftests after I have learnt these testcases.

Thanks.

> 
>>
>>>
>>> Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) (8):
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Remove fsdax_pgoff argument from __add_to_kill
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Pass addr to __add_to_kill()
>>>   mm: Return the address from page_mapped_in_vma()
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Convert shake_page() to shake_folio()
>>>   mm: Convert hugetlb_page_mapping_lock_write to folio
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Convert memory_failure() to use a folio
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Convert hwpoison_user_mappings to take a folio
>>>   mm/memory-failure: Add some folio conversions to unpoison_memory
>>
>> Thanks for your patches. I will review them as soon as possible.
>>
>>>
>>>  include/linux/hugetlb.h |   6 +-
>>>  include/linux/mm.h      |   1 -
>>>  include/linux/rmap.h    |   2 +-
>>>  mm/hugetlb.c            |   6 +-
>>>  mm/hwpoison-inject.c    |  11 +--
>>>  mm/internal.h           |   1 +
>>>  mm/memory-failure.c     | 144 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>>  mm/migrate.c            |   2 +-
>>>  mm/page_vma_mapped.c    |  14 ++--
>>>  9 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>>
>