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.