From: Sarthak Sharma <sarthak.sharma@arm.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org
Cc: ljs@kernel.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, vbabka@kernel.org,
rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ryan.roberts@arm.com,
anshuman.khandual@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/mm: Simplify byte pattern checking in mremap_test
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 17:08:50 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b6d95c9a-e12b-497f-9017-93b184d8622f@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260410143031.148173-1-dev.jain@arm.com>
On 4/10/26 8:00 PM, Dev Jain wrote:
> The original version of mremap_test (7df666253f26: "kselftests: vm: add
> mremap tests") validated remapped contents byte-by-byte and printed a
> mismatch index in case the bytes streams are not equal. That made
> validation expensive in both cases: for "no mismatch" (the common case when
> mremap is not buggy), it still walked all bytes in C; for "mismatch", it
> broke out of the loop after printing the mismatch index.
>
> Later, my commit 7033c6cc9620 ("selftests/mm: mremap_test: optimize
> execution time from minutes to seconds using chunkwise memcmp") tried to
> optimize both cases by using chunk-wise memcmp() and only scanning bytes
> within a range which has been determined by memcmp as mismatching.
>
> But get_sqrt() in that commit is buggy: `high = mid - 1` is applied
> unconditionally. This makes the speed of checking the mismatch index
> suboptimal.
>
> The mismatch index does not provide useful debugging value here: if
> validation fails, we know mremap behavior is wrong, and the specific byte
> offset does not make root-causing easier.
>
> So instead of fixing get_sqrt(), bite the bullet, drop mismatch index
> scanning and just compare the two byte streams with memcmp().
>
> Reported-by: Sarthak Sharma <sarthak.sharma@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
I have tested this patch with
./mremap_test -t 0
and the selftest results are unchanged.
I did not observe any significant change in execution time across
multiple runs.
Tested-by: Sarthak Sharma <sarthak.sharma@arm.com>
> ---
> Sorry for sending two patchsets the same day - the problem was made known
> to me today, and I couldn't help myself but fix it immediately, imagine
> my embarrassment when I found out that I made a typo in the binary search
> code which I had been writing consistently throughout college :)
>
> Applies on mm-unstable.
>
> tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c | 109 +++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c
> index 308576437228c..131d9d6db8679 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/mremap_test.c
> @@ -76,27 +76,6 @@ enum {
> .expect_failure = should_fail \
> }
>
> -/* compute square root using binary search */
> -static unsigned long get_sqrt(unsigned long val)
> -{
> - unsigned long low = 1;
> -
> - /* assuming rand_size is less than 1TB */
> - unsigned long high = (1UL << 20);
> -
> - while (low <= high) {
> - unsigned long mid = low + (high - low) / 2;
> - unsigned long temp = mid * mid;
> -
> - if (temp == val)
> - return mid;
> - if (temp < val)
> - low = mid + 1;
> - high = mid - 1;
> - }
> - return low;
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Returns false if the requested remap region overlaps with an
> * existing mapping (e.g text, stack) else returns true.
> @@ -995,11 +974,9 @@ static long long remap_region(struct config c, unsigned int threshold_mb,
> char *rand_addr)
> {
> void *addr, *tmp_addr, *src_addr, *dest_addr, *dest_preamble_addr = NULL;
> - unsigned long long t, d;
> struct timespec t_start = {0, 0}, t_end = {0, 0};
> long long start_ns, end_ns, align_mask, ret, offset;
> unsigned long long threshold;
> - unsigned long num_chunks;
>
> if (threshold_mb == VALIDATION_NO_THRESHOLD)
> threshold = c.region_size;
> @@ -1068,87 +1045,21 @@ static long long remap_region(struct config c, unsigned int threshold_mb,
> goto clean_up_dest_preamble;
> }
>
> - /*
> - * Verify byte pattern after remapping. Employ an algorithm with a
> - * square root time complexity in threshold: divide the range into
> - * chunks, if memcmp() returns non-zero, only then perform an
> - * iteration in that chunk to find the mismatch index.
> - */
> - num_chunks = get_sqrt(threshold);
> - for (unsigned long i = 0; i < num_chunks; ++i) {
> - size_t chunk_size = threshold / num_chunks;
> - unsigned long shift = i * chunk_size;
> -
> - if (!memcmp(dest_addr + shift, rand_addr + shift, chunk_size))
> - continue;
> -
> - /* brute force iteration only over mismatch segment */
> - for (t = shift; t < shift + chunk_size; ++t) {
> - if (((char *) dest_addr)[t] != rand_addr[t]) {
> - ksft_print_msg("Data after remap doesn't match at offset %llu\n",
> - t);
> - ksft_print_msg("Expected: %#x\t Got: %#x\n", rand_addr[t] & 0xff,
> - ((char *) dest_addr)[t] & 0xff);
> - ret = -1;
> - goto clean_up_dest;
> - }
> - }
> - }
> -
> - /*
> - * if threshold is not divisible by num_chunks, then check the
> - * last chunk
> - */
> - for (t = num_chunks * (threshold / num_chunks); t < threshold; ++t) {
> - if (((char *) dest_addr)[t] != rand_addr[t]) {
> - ksft_print_msg("Data after remap doesn't match at offset %llu\n",
> - t);
> - ksft_print_msg("Expected: %#x\t Got: %#x\n", rand_addr[t] & 0xff,
> - ((char *) dest_addr)[t] & 0xff);
> - ret = -1;
> - goto clean_up_dest;
> - }
> + /* Verify byte pattern after remapping */
> + if (memcmp(dest_addr, rand_addr, threshold)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Data after remap doesn't match\n");
> + ret = -1;
> + goto clean_up_dest;
> }
>
> /* Verify the dest preamble byte pattern after remapping */
> - if (!c.dest_preamble_size)
> - goto no_preamble;
> -
> - num_chunks = get_sqrt(c.dest_preamble_size);
> -
> - for (unsigned long i = 0; i < num_chunks; ++i) {
> - size_t chunk_size = c.dest_preamble_size / num_chunks;
> - unsigned long shift = i * chunk_size;
> -
> - if (!memcmp(dest_preamble_addr + shift, rand_addr + shift,
> - chunk_size))
> - continue;
> -
> - /* brute force iteration only over mismatched segment */
> - for (d = shift; d < shift + chunk_size; ++d) {
> - if (((char *) dest_preamble_addr)[d] != rand_addr[d]) {
> - ksft_print_msg("Preamble data after remap doesn't match at offset %llu\n",
> - d);
> - ksft_print_msg("Expected: %#x\t Got: %#x\n", rand_addr[d] & 0xff,
> - ((char *) dest_preamble_addr)[d] & 0xff);
> - ret = -1;
> - goto clean_up_dest;
> - }
> - }
> - }
> -
> - for (d = num_chunks * (c.dest_preamble_size / num_chunks); d < c.dest_preamble_size; ++d) {
> - if (((char *) dest_preamble_addr)[d] != rand_addr[d]) {
> - ksft_print_msg("Preamble data after remap doesn't match at offset %llu\n",
> - d);
> - ksft_print_msg("Expected: %#x\t Got: %#x\n", rand_addr[d] & 0xff,
> - ((char *) dest_preamble_addr)[d] & 0xff);
> - ret = -1;
> - goto clean_up_dest;
> - }
> + if (c.dest_preamble_size &&
> + memcmp(dest_preamble_addr, rand_addr, c.dest_preamble_size)) {
> + ksft_print_msg("Preamble data after remap doesn't match\n");
> + ret = -1;
> + goto clean_up_dest;
> }
>
> -no_preamble:
> start_ns = t_start.tv_sec * NS_PER_SEC + t_start.tv_nsec;
> end_ns = t_end.tv_sec * NS_PER_SEC + t_end.tv_nsec;
> ret = end_ns - start_ns;
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-14 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-10 14:30 Dev Jain
2026-04-13 19:27 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-14 5:09 ` Dev Jain
2026-04-14 7:31 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-04-14 11:57 ` Dev Jain
2026-04-14 8:01 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-14 9:47 ` David Laight
2026-04-14 9:53 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-14 12:00 ` Dev Jain
2026-04-14 11:53 ` Dev Jain
2026-04-14 11:38 ` Sarthak Sharma [this message]
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=b6d95c9a-e12b-497f-9017-93b184d8622f@arm.com \
--to=sarthak.sharma@arm.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@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