On 8/7/25 1:57 PM, Wei Yang wrote:
Currently it hard coded the number of hugepage to check for
check_huge_anon(), but we already have the number passed in.
Do the check based on the number of hugepage passed in is more
reasonable.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
index 44a3f8a58806..bf40e6b121ab 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static void verify_rss_anon_split_huge_page_all_zeroes(char
*one_page, int nr_hp
unsigned long rss_anon_before, rss_anon_after;
size_t i;
- if (!check_huge_anon(one_page, 4, pmd_pagesize))
+ if (!check_huge_anon(one_page, nr_hpages, pmd_pagesize))
ksft_exit_fail_msg("No THP is allocated\n");
rss_anon_before = rss_anon();
LGTM
reviewed-by: Donet Tom <[email protected]>
