Hi,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:42:09PM -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
>
> This is a real failure, but expected so signal that to the test harness:
I don't think its a real failure. If the kernel does not support
UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE for shared memory the userfaultfd_zeropage_test can be
simply skipped.
> # ./userfaultfd shmem 10 10
> nr_pages: 160, nr_pages_per_cpu: 80
> bounces: 9, mode: rnd poll, UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE unsupported in shmem VMAs
> # echo $?
> 2
>
> Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauer...@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> index bc9ec38fbc34..686fe96f617f 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c
> @@ -1115,6 +1115,14 @@ static int userfaultfd_stress(void)
> expected_ioctls = uffd_test_ops->expected_ioctls;
> if ((uffdio_register.ioctls & expected_ioctls) !=
> expected_ioctls) {
> + if (test_type == TEST_SHMEM &&
> + (uffdio_register.ioctls & expected_ioctls) ==
> + UFFD_API_RANGE_IOCTLS_BASIC) {
> + fprintf(stderr,
> + "UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE unsupported in shmem
> VMAs\n");
> + return KSFT_XFAIL;
> + }
> +
By all means, this check should be moved to userfaultfd_zeropage_test().
Ideally, we should call here ksft_test_result_skip() and simply return from
the function.
> fprintf(stderr,
> "unexpected missing ioctl for anon memory\n");
> return 1;
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
