On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 18:48:49 +0200 David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05.06.25 18:15, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 05:00:49PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > > >> This seems to be causing tests to fail rather than be skipped if hugetlb > >> isn't configured. I bisected the problem to this patch so it's definitely > >> changed how things are handled (though of course it might just be > >> _revealing_ some previously existing bug in this test...). > > > >> Using a couple of tests as an example: > > > >> Before this patch: > > > >> # [RUN] R/O longterm GUP-fast pin in MAP_PRIVATE file mapping ... with > >> memfd hugetlb (2048 kB) > >> # memfd_create() failed (Cannot allocate memory) > >> not ok 39 R/O longterm GUP-fast pin in MAP_PRIVATE file mapping ... with > >> memfd hugetlb (2048 kB) > >> # [RUN] R/O longterm GUP-fast pin in MAP_PRIVATE file mapping ... with > >> memfd hugetlb (1048576 kB) > >> # memfd_create() failed (Cannot allocate memory) > >> not ok 40 R/O longterm GUP-fast pin in MAP_PRIVATE file mapping ... with > >> memfd hugetlb (1048576 kB) > > > > That's the thing with memfd being special and skipping on setup failure > > that David mentioned, I've got a patch as part of the formatting series > > I was going to send after the merge window. > > @Andew, why did this series get merged already? Late merge window hastiness :( And I saw nothing worrisome in the review.
