On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:46:33PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello Mike, > > Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 07:00:46PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > >> If userfaultfd runs on a system that doesn't support UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE for > >> shared memory, it currently ends with error code 1 which indicates test > >> failure: > >> > >> # ./userfaultfd shmem 10 10 > >> nr_pages: 160, nr_pages_per_cpu: 80 > >> bounces: 9, mode: rnd poll, unexpected missing ioctl for anon memory > >> # echo $? > >> 1 > >> > >> Change userfaultfd_zeropage_test() to return KSFT_SKIP to indicate that > >> the test is being skipped. > > > > I took a deeper look at what userfaultfd_zeropage_test() does and, > > apparently, I've mislead you. The test checks if the range has > > UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE and verifies that it works if yes; otherwise the test > > verifies that EINVAL is returned. > > > > Can you please check if the patch below works in your environment? > > > > From 7a34c84c0461b5073742275638c44b6535d19166 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:44:19 +0300 > > Subject: [PATCH] userfaultfd: selftest: make supported range ioctl > > verification more robust > > > > When userfaultfd tests runs on older kernel that does not support > > UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE for shared memory it fails at the ioctl verification. > > > > Split out the verification that supported ioctls are superset of the > > expected ioctls and relax the checks for UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE for shared memory > > areas. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 63 > > +++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > I'm sorry to take this long to respond, I was only able to get back to > this today.
No problem :) > Your patch does solve my problem. Thank you very much! > > It has a trivial conflict in the second hunk with patch 3 in my series. > Should I repost the series with your patch in place of patch 4? Yep. > -- > Thiago Jung Bauermann > IBM Linux Technology Center -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
