From: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
Gleb Fotengauer-Malinovskiy <glebfm@altlinux.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linuxkselftest <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] userfaultfd: selftests: modify selftest to use /dev/userfaultfd
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 15:16:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJHvVcj=pL8y_b_urq8QvtDvRRMmjgGkquQM6xhxWwiajNrhKQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220412134159.f0a1d0d77f5b01638007bf4b@linux-foundation.org>
Thanks for looking Andrew. And, fair criticism.
In keeping with the status quo, I'm thinking of just adding a new
command-line argument which toggles between the two modes.
But, if I'm honest, it's starting to feel like the test has way too
many arguments... I'm tempted to refactor the test to use the
kselftest framework [1], get rid of all these command line arguments,
and just always test everything. But, this seems like a big and
perhaps controversial refactor, so I may take it up after this
series...
[1]: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kselftest.html
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 1:42 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:29:42 -0700 Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Prefer this new interface, but if using it fails for any reason just
> > fall back to using userfaultfd(2) as before.
>
> This seems a poor idea - the old interface will henceforth be untested.
>
> Why not tweak the code to test both interfaces?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-18 22:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-12 20:29 [PATCH 1/2] userfaultfd: add /dev/userfaultfd for fine grained access control Axel Rasmussen
2022-04-12 20:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] userfaultfd: selftests: modify selftest to use /dev/userfaultfd Axel Rasmussen
2022-04-12 20:41 ` Andrew Morton
2022-04-18 22:16 ` Axel Rasmussen [this message]
2022-04-19 3:32 ` Andrew Morton
2022-04-12 20:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] userfaultfd: add /dev/userfaultfd for fine grained access control Andrew Morton
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='CAJHvVcj=pL8y_b_urq8QvtDvRRMmjgGkquQM6xhxWwiajNrhKQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=glebfm@altlinux.org \
--cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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