From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB54C47082 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1562B610A1 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1562B610A1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id AA99A6B006C; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:10:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id A7F926B006E; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:10:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 947D26B0070; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:10:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0245.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.245]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643AF6B006C for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:10:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05FE9180AD801 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78226205022.15.A3874D1 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by imf30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 768B4E000262 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 718971FDA5; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1623053409; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NN/NQnziwslkNFgyu/32WXF9fOyovwCDi+PNXgUNu+8=; b=DXNBwOjaAJXb/et+FP2EkmFlLJ6EWr11ds9F+xm21tjXLCntBQY0iNj4JNIv/fc3GN543+ DBigiMyXSnUX2htWnojyJ+7F1e0RDM/WkT0cD91/aygQ61Sp3bUvXmUlWTXrXURWOR94N1 tIpVceBRpPj0O92s2GJMynnugHh4iyY= Received: from suse.cz (unknown [10.100.201.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1DECA3B8F; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:10:08 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: kernel test robot Cc: Feng Tang , 0day robot , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org, ltp@lists.linux.it, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Dave Hansen , Ben Widawsky , Andrea Arcangeli , Mel Gorman , Mike Kravetz , Randy Dunlap , Vlastimil Babka , Andi Kleen , Dan Williams , ying.huang@intel.com Subject: Re: [mm/mempolicy] 7463fff037: ltp.mbind01.fail Message-ID: References: <1622560492-1294-3-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <20210607074815.GC16270@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210607074815.GC16270@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 768B4E000262 Authentication-Results: imf30.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=DXNBwOja; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf30.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com X-Stat-Signature: 81cciocho36q6kurgi977wt9py183auc X-HE-Tag: 1623053409-525428 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon 07-06-21 15:48:15, kernel test robot wrote: > mbind01.c:169: TINFO: case MPOL_PREFERRED (no target) > mbind01.c:188: TFAIL: Wrong policy: 1, expected: 4 AFAIU this points to static void test_none(unsigned int i, char *p) { struct test_case *tc = &tcase[i]; TEST(mbind(p, MEM_LENGTH, tc->policy, NULL, 0, tc->flags)); } So it calls MPOL_PREFERRED with NULL parameter and the test has failed because the kernel returns MPOL_LOCAL instead of MPOL_PREFERRED. Strictly speaking this is breaking user interface but I am wondering whether this really matter or is completely unexpected. The manual page explicitly talks about this case " If the nodemask and maxnode arguments specify the empty set, then the memory is allocated on the node of the CPU that triggered the allocation. " I would be inclined to keep this inconsistency and see whether anybody actually complains and have a relevant use for this behavior. The cleanup which makes the code easier to maintain and less error prone doesn't really deserve to get ditched just because of this IMHO. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs