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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3730EC54EE9 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:02:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 96B616B0072; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:02:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 91AB66B0073; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:02:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7E1828D0001; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:02:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF106B0072 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:02:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E80C121380 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:02:53 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79862775426.29.49D21BD Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AECA0062 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:02:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E79D1B820BD; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:02:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F50CC433C1; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:02:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1662019369; bh=8TSBzYjw7mSc7yWeMsk9HL6g+Ac5v57wecczsgyg+qQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=epZq/1X4bSwAzF/qwZ8C4CqMUZbqFRmrTLuY768JGLsmXCmnyRZM4vtqsHFvcKruH bkox3CNkp1Au1KWz/snYmhEBBAmcUcX0e6lJn7f91Kbr7WFCKCmccGnp64m5W2+Hit NYxCN11xcNzrtW0ESG38zfUSvEOAPPCi60fxI7hRme+OLbFAMjw5/vkjtKD4j1xxm0 qLSGO/6qYw+eMmENTZI01uncrkL+zznKjHdWo+vx979Tv/0ps045VSu+4KYnyaGKGe VScwdUa9MJS+ZMran7Q/fX2T4WFp2TInm0RBl7bJ85Wr7LqbaGnunrnxYoaOrtGJBK oUosqd7IB5d9g== Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 11:02:35 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: shaoqin.huang@intel.com Cc: Karolina Drobnik , David Hildenbrand , Rebecca Mckeever , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] memblock test: Add test to memblock_add() 129th region Message-ID: References: <20220830014925.162718-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> <20220830014925.162718-2-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220830014925.162718-2-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1662019372; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=QVRhxVRN/3UU4Fb5u4yDshOHcCr0d+UXKgAq3Kw/3is=; b=8A6ONWVt3ZrPYLY6IAQKtEMc6XkTo9wQyjaD4IiirMDzVoxlQm3Ub0vPiO+cVqa/6T0cw6 rME7tg5kevA/XRfOTkHhqhSOd3pOogQaFX3yZoGIpyrAQeWZu971VyL/z30F/oMTsVbb7U dyVd4gCTz9KblrN3uwWZGRNSsBjscnA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b="epZq/1X4"; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 145.40.68.75 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1662019372; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=P/rR/eRDaMx4nfwfapEnc4RxaANDJDTp3F9sPs2FjBAiZr6LmBYdyao8mhP8Rb4mCWanV9 n9GpCKzKQkFANtZI3jZ1oinXJcD8YSsuYFZe6QcVk02tMRW96LU2LoKnc/xpS9opUp+XZc 6LN6VWWDriwuyo2cSIwxqpIPSZ+43ds= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A6AECA0062 Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b="epZq/1X4"; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 145.40.68.75 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam10 X-Stat-Signature: ec6hybew66u6a3dsw7opq6fforq3s5wi X-HE-Tag: 1662019372-616577 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 Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:49:17AM +0800, shaoqin.huang@intel.com wrote: > From: Shaoqin Huang > > Add 129th region into the memblock, and this will trigger the > memblock_double_array() function, this needs valid memory regions. So > using dummy_physical_memory_init() to allocate a valid memory region, and > fake the other memory region, so it make sure the memblock_double_array() > will always choose the valid memory region that is allocated by the > dummy_physical_memory_init(). So memblock_double_array() must success. > > Another thing should be done is to restore the memory.regions after > memblock_double_array(), due to now the memory.regions is pointing to a > memory region allocated by dummy_physical_memory_init(). And it will > affect the subsequent tests if we don't restore the memory region. So > simply record the origin region, and restore it after the test. > > Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang > --- > tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c | 7 +- > tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 3 + > 3 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > index 66f46f261e66..c8e201156cdc 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > @@ -326,6 +326,87 @@ static int memblock_add_twice_check(void) > return 0; > } > > +/* > + * A test that tries to add the 129th memory block. > + * Expect to trigger memblock_double_array() to double the > + * memblock.memory.max, find a new valid memory as > + * memory.regions. > + */ > +static int memblock_add_many_check(void) > +{ > + int i; > + void *orig_region; > + struct region r = { > + .base = SZ_16K, > + .size = MEM_SIZE, > + }; > + phys_addr_t memory_base = SZ_128K; > + > + PREFIX_PUSH(); > + > + reset_memblock_regions(); > + memblock_allow_resize(); > + > + /* > + * Add one valid memory region, this will be choosed to be the memory > + * that new memory.regions occupied. > + */ > + dummy_physical_memory_init(); > + memblock_add((phys_addr_t)get_memory_block_base(), MEM_SIZE); > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, 1); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, MEM_SIZE); > + > + for (i = 1; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; i++) { > + /* Add some fakes memory region to fulfill the memblock. */ > + memblock_add(memory_base, MEM_SIZE); I would rather prefer to memblock_add() ranges from the simulated memory created in dummy_physical_memory_init(). 16K will be probably too small, but I don't see problem with increasing MEM_SIZE. > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, i + 1); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, (i + 1) * MEM_SIZE); > + > + /* Keep the gap so these memory region will not be merged. */ > + memory_base += MEM_SIZE * 2; > + } > + > + orig_region = memblock.memory.regions; > + > + /* This adds the 129 memory_region, and makes it double array. */ > + memblock_add((phys_addr_t)memory_base, MEM_SIZE); memory_base is already phys_addr_t, isn't it? > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1) * MEM_SIZE); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, 1); > + /* This is the size used by new memory.regions. Check it. */ > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, PAGE_ALIGN(INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2 * > + sizeof(struct memblock_region))); > + Can you please elaborate what does the following sequence test? > + /* The base is very small, so it should be insert to the first region. */ > + memblock_add(r.base, r.size); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.regions[0].base, r.base); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.regions[0].size, r.size); > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2) * MEM_SIZE); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); > + > + dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(); > + > + /* > + * The current memory.regions is occupying a range of memory that > + * allocated from dummy_physical_memory_init(). After free the memory, > + * we must not use it. So restore the origin memory region to make sure > + * the tests can run as normal and not affected by the double array. > + */ > + memblock.memory.regions = orig_region; > + memblock.memory.cnt = INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; > + > + test_pass_pop(); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static int memblock_add_checks(void) > { > prefix_reset(); > @@ -339,6 +420,7 @@ static int memblock_add_checks(void) > memblock_add_overlap_bottom_check(); > memblock_add_within_check(); > memblock_add_twice_check(); > + memblock_add_many_check(); > > prefix_pop(); > > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c > index 76a8ad818f3a..96fabd96ff31 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c > @@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ > #include > #include > > -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128 > -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS > #define PREFIXES_MAX 15 > #define DELIM ": " > > @@ -77,6 +75,11 @@ void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void) > free(memory_block.base); > } > > +void *get_memory_block_base(void) > +{ > + return memory_block.base; > +} > + > static void usage(const char *prog) > { > BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(help_opts) != ARRAY_SIZE(long_opts) - 1); > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h > index d396e5423a8e..d56af621c543 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ > #include <../selftests/kselftest.h> > > #define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K > +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128 > +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS > > /** > * ASSERT_EQ(): > @@ -73,6 +75,7 @@ void reset_memblock_attributes(void); > void setup_memblock(void); > void dummy_physical_memory_init(void); > void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void); > +void *get_memory_block_base(void); Let's make it phys_addr_t dummy_physical_memory_base(void); > void parse_args(int argc, char **argv); > > void test_fail(void); > -- > 2.34.1 > > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.