On 8 Aug 2025, at 11:56, Zi Yan wrote: > On 7 Aug 2025, at 4:27, Wei Yang wrote: > >> Currently it hard coded the number of hugepage to check for >> check_huge_anon(), but we already have the number passed in. >> >> Do the check based on the number of hugepage passed in is more >> reasonable. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <[email protected]> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c >> b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c >> index 44a3f8a58806..bf40e6b121ab 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c >> @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static void >> verify_rss_anon_split_huge_page_all_zeroes(char *one_page, int nr_hp >> unsigned long rss_anon_before, rss_anon_after; >> size_t i; >> >> - if (!check_huge_anon(one_page, 4, pmd_pagesize)) >> + if (!check_huge_anon(one_page, nr_hpages, pmd_pagesize)) >> ksft_exit_fail_msg("No THP is allocated\n"); >> >> rss_anon_before = rss_anon(); > > Which commit is this patch based on? > > In mm-new[1], verify_rss_anon_split_huge_page_all_zeroes() accepts > char *one_page and size_t len but no nr_hpages. This breaks > split_huge_page_test.c compilation. > > Are you forgetting some cleanup patches before this one? > > [1] > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git/tree/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c?h=mm-new#n110 > > > Hi Andrew, > > Can you drop this one for now? Thanks.
Wait. It seems that mm-new is different from Linus' tree[1]. I wonder what is going on. [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/testing/selftests/mm/split_huge_page_test.c?h=v6.16#n109 -- Best Regards, Yan, Zi
