Re: [PATCH v2 09/13] selftests/mm: skip uffd-wp-mremap if UFFD write-protect is unsupported

[Sayali Patil]

On 25/03/26 05:26, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 19:56:01 +0530 Sayali Patil <saya...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

Because right now it reads as if it would be returning a bool.

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <da...@kernel.org>

Thanks for the review. I'll rename it to
"check_uffd_wp_feature_supported()" in the next version.
There was no next version.  I added this:

--- 
a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-wp-mremap.c~selftests-mm-skip-uffd-wp-mremap-if-uffd-write-protect-is-unsupported-fix
+++ a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-wp-mremap.c
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ static size_t thpsizes[20];
  static int nr_hugetlbsizes;
  static size_t hugetlbsizes[10];
  
-static void uffd_wp_feature_supported(void)
+static void check_uffd_wp_feature_supported(void)
  {
        uint64_t features;
  
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
        struct thp_settings settings;
        int i, j, plan = 0;
  
-	uffd_wp_feature_supported();
+       check_uffd_wp_feature_supported();
  
  	pagesize = getpagesize();
        nr_thpsizes = detect_thp_sizes(thpsizes, ARRAY_SIZE(thpsizes));
_

Hi Andrew,
I have some updates to [PATCH v2 04/13] selftests/mm: fix cgroup task 
placement and tolerance in hugetlb_reparenting_test.sh, as Venkat 
reported failures with the current version.

Should I send a v3 of the full series, or just a fixup patch for 
hugetlb_reparenting_test.sh? Also, if you prefer a v3, should I include 
above fix for 
selftests-mm-skip-uffd-wp-mremap-if-uffd-write-protect-is-unsupported as 
well?

Thanks,
Sayali