Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752327AbaJ0U3R (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:29:17 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:27269 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751605AbaJ0U3Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:29:16 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,797,1406617200"; d="scan'208";a="597180111" Message-ID: <544EAB1A.2030403@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:29:14 -0700 From: Darren Hart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart Subject: Re: futex testsuite suggestion... References: <20141027.155656.1414383076601514662.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20141027.155656.1414383076601514662.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/27/14 12:56, David Miller wrote: > > First of all, thanks so much for writing your futex test suite, it's > proved invaluable for sparc64 kernel development for me lately. Hi David, Glad to hear it :-) > > I'd like to suggest that you add a test that triggers transparent > hugepages, because if an architecture doesn't implement > __get_user_pages_fast() such futexes cause a machine to hang. > > I hacked up something simple that took the existing performance > test and made it operate in a register allocated using memalign(). > > I would suggest doing a memalign(HUGEPAGE_SIZE, HUGEPAGE_SIZE) then > iterating running a futex test within each normal page within that > hugepage. Do you want this option for the performance tests, or would a less intensive functional test be sufficient? The other thing to note is there have been several efforts/false starts to get futextests into perf and kselftest. We currently considering splitting futextests across the two (performance to perf, functional to kselftest). The TODO for a fuzz tester is handled *more* than adequately by trinity. I'm perfectly happy to add such a test. I'm currently buried under a number of other things that have resulted in futextests suffering somewhat. So a couple of things to help make this happen: 1) Could you send me your hacked up test, in whatever condition? 2) I'm more than happy to accept patches, but I do understand why you might prefer to have someone else write it :-) Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/