Received: by 2002:a05:6358:45e:b0:b5:b6eb:e1f9 with SMTP id 30csp407818rwe; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 01:15:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR6eYNBjUhJP+3NJ+DL2otlZ2PfadQLrMI8ws1dJW50ygSjySs4h7Q7qcnPFBTKnPlLKvume X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2704:b0:1fd:aaa9:6d0b with SMTP id px4-20020a17090b270400b001fdaaa96d0bmr7417129pjb.128.1662020120353; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 01:15:20 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1662020120; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=IJj+PeZHIh7kLB9bc2FHHB8fD9R4HzGGGiVA8UAtZF5ZqkXZT1JSGW59T79kw4KQjY g0dZMYuQEdkikDmv9Yqzzvc5Fk2jESdU3QqoX1DuA4JkuLBNWy76STlOaMPf1dMTewdZ jfBNpoqki8ZvTnMZSfYyU7E/6sY5FJCy+HUBDuSJTxPLGWFplJIEvM6/cAJphCHr8Kef DByN11Pw1fFM/hRiO74iNioy7yzOMVnGzmf+FR08gocAo5ggXAjNbdDsrd2e/UwIrDlJ iM49lYrDIbCIuqVS4JlsSIk8BrSjknww/9j44BxT/mr2hMmrKUJMB/pB2+msN0iMmH5y zl7Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=b+WAw+ib3gS4Dt9sIJS4jidC1bkJxPpDHSYXOlfwurg=; b=Qf/1Sb8Sky3rQQHi7+kNb2WaDP3tcDnStLnB1YgtJ8wJlr74ugF3pCS/82i9oBOLdW Qu4bTg8gG1ylupJonIqJNcLVjb+L8xaIMhjYJNr7acMBWqqBnbN0OafGYPtfWT0VG0vY lkNUom8wP/Kg7R9M6f0WokO9jeYPflHSUu+rvRi4ymXNXk+MjZ2T2qO8gQDas1uwLJrq eKetTKFHU0FWemvrGD0ce+XHLf2d8irI95W1z7qL7v/DZO/4JNHi50l+bqZjTeGKUW8f OBlwbTIOi5PCUvwJzHwYh7wsZaiZNfQFQw73j1RXQ+T11J+HrQlVUTrDhdAEVaUFXbt/ mExA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=NmXCAQMm; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g16-20020a056a0023d000b0052f73fa95dasi5479770pfc.355.2022.09.01.01.15.07; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 01:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=NmXCAQMm; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233833AbiIAIJ1 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:09:27 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35628 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233807AbiIAIJD (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2022 04:09:03 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFD6A1299D3 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 01:08:47 -0700 (PDT) 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 dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8634461DD4 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:08:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9079C433D6; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 08:08:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1662019726; bh=zzhgRRnZ4VXO746UDBVKOeVre1Ydh3irZCJn6wafIdM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NmXCAQMmBUjayWEAO6Z5SmEScBRevRAG0OWjLFVBfv+7Q6FYSctASOkREZjKIuYB7 ZXLRfpYpdf5DtDyc+buQySUlrKaHy/lddaFqio+5nEfAedzVrF7ckK9na/L4K7zXJ4 7+pqMvnqfhROpF3LC4xZWT8RB/RRmBbJowFQcnyQz02AdNB3sixaxaY6748Bz6sZEE ciUnCTeq4iInkNv2NC21O+WT+E14LOccLQ5VbTh6HktmrfZ3NVOdMBNycFbO+dssYo W+glyxjmF2YoiUsVmEPMKcnKD2NQso9rXNuEqqv++TQBWD65zhrwyR00ZkqtocrRut U6J8/mewE/SAQ== Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 11:08:33 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: shaoqin.huang@intel.com Cc: Karolina Drobnik , Rebecca Mckeever , David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] memblock test: Add test to memblock_reserve() 129th region Message-ID: References: <20220830014925.162718-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> <20220830014925.162718-3-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220830014925.162718-3-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:49:18AM +0800, shaoqin.huang@intel.com wrote: > From: Shaoqin Huang > > Reserve 129th region in 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. > At the same time, reserve 128 faked memory region, and make sure these > reserved region not intersect with the valid memory region. So > memblock_double_array() will choose the valid memory region, and it will > success. > > Also need to restore the reserved.regions after memblock_double_array(), > to make sure the subsequent tests can run as normal. > > Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang > --- > tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > index c8e201156cdc..d8defc9866cb 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c > @@ -686,6 +686,92 @@ static int memblock_reserve_twice_check(void) > return 0; > } > > +/* > + * A test that tries to reserve the 129th memory block. > + * Expect to trigger memblock_double_array() to double the > + * memblock.memory.max, find a new valid memory as > + * reserved.regions. > + */ > +static int memblock_reserve_many_check(void) > +{ > + int i; > + void *orig_region; > + struct region r = { > + .base = SZ_16K, > + .size = MEM_SIZE, > + }; > + phys_addr_t memory_base = SZ_128K; > + phys_addr_t new_reserved_regions_size; > + > + PREFIX_PUSH(); > + > + reset_memblock_regions(); > + memblock_allow_resize(); > + > + /* Add a valid memory region used by double_array(). */ > + dummy_physical_memory_init(); > + memblock_add((phys_addr_t)get_memory_block_base(), MEM_SIZE); > + > + for (i = 0; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; i++) { > + /* Reserve some fakes memory region to fulfill the memblock. */ > + memblock_reserve(memory_base, MEM_SIZE); > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, i + 1); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.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.reserved.regions; > + > + /* This reserve the 129 memory_region, and makes it double array. */ > + memblock_reserve(memory_base, MEM_SIZE); > + > + /* > + * This is the memory region size used by the doubled reserved.regions, > + * and it has been reserved due to it has been used. The size is used to > + * calculate the total_size that the memblock.reserved have now. > + */ > + new_reserved_regions_size = PAGE_ALIGN((INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2) * > + sizeof(struct memblock_region)); > + /* > + * The double_array() will find a free memory region as the new > + * reserved.regions, and the used memory region will be reserved, so > + * there will be one more region exist in the reserved memblock. And the > + * one more reserved region's size is new_reserved_regions_size. > + */ > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1 + 1); +2 would be fine ^ > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1) * MEM_SIZE + > + new_reserved_regions_size); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); > + Can you please elaborate what does the below sequence check? > + /* The base is very small, so it should be insert to the first region. */ > + memblock_reserve(r.base, r.size); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.regions[0].base, r.base); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.regions[0].size, r.size); > + > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2 + 1); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2) * MEM_SIZE + > + new_reserved_regions_size); > + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); > + > + dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(); > + > + /* > + * The current reserved.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.reserved.regions = orig_region; > + memblock.reserved.cnt = INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; > + > + test_pass_pop(); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static int memblock_reserve_checks(void) > { > prefix_reset(); > @@ -698,6 +784,7 @@ static int memblock_reserve_checks(void) > memblock_reserve_overlap_bottom_check(); > memblock_reserve_within_check(); > memblock_reserve_twice_check(); > + memblock_reserve_many_check(); > > prefix_pop(); > > -- > 2.34.1 > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.