From nobody Sun Feb 8 19:27:36 2026 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2FCC4332F for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:22:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229949AbiJKGWO (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:22:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51990 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229905AbiJKGVp (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:21:45 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C39A8760DA for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 23:21:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1665469290; x=1697005290; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0qxV4gyJ/ejlW/tPGTWrK8Ih4YPly+7yJn9Z1PGkJMw=; b=hLkZ9tdstUoXucqVo7lHgfjQPkEuVMQ7UoRs+2IcyRgHpdsmd6xjIhIv 6Zqd/FT/8DFj4xSgf/qVnA/LcoYcmsRjpYZBbZsKTdXr+feL+6j76JNVN rUy5/y1giLUMStrIyfbYThjBk7dVlz2YSssm3LAgSFLzmWx85+AZ81BBO zgdctNa8paGmHFnjF/TSRq9awDxhjOM3g4mNR5rK5RN3ZXUOEl3IWbeJb fEg3aKvqvMc+HHBtVryk+OSFX6jftsY8IUNRwIQaFLVoyPAD0fzsSXIda U9cNU74YSyhCfkD0juSqCz9NwJDF0JB/m6+hRRT3HtNtiOEeD7FqcpOhy Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="284149486" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="284149486" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:16 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="577321977" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="577321977" Received: from q.bj.intel.com ([10.238.154.102]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:14 -0700 From: shaoqin.huang@intel.com To: rppt@kernel.org Cc: Shaoqin Huang , Rebecca Mckeever , Karolina Drobnik , David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v4 1/3] memblock test: Add test to memblock_add() 129th region Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 14:21:20 +0800 Message-Id: <20221011062128.49359-2-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> References: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Shaoqin Huang Add 129th region into the memblock, and this will trigger the memblock_double_array() function, this needs valid memory regions. So using dummy_physical_memory_init() to allocate a large enough memory region, and split it into a large enough memory which can be choosed by memblock_double_array(), and the left memory will be split into small memory region, and add them into the memblock. It make sure the memblock_double_array() will always choose the valid memory region that is allocated by the dummy_physical_memory_init(). So memblock_double_array() must success. Another thing should be done is to restore the memory.regions after memblock_double_array(), due to now the memory.regions is pointing to a memory region allocated by dummy_physical_memory_init(). And it will affect the subsequent tests if we don't restore the memory region. So simply record the origin region, and restore it after the test. Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang --- tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c | 7 +- tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h | 6 +- 3 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c b/tools/testing/membl= ock/tests/basic_api.c index a13a57ba0815..4d61a4b474be 100644 --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c @@ -423,6 +423,98 @@ static int memblock_add_near_max_check(void) return 0; } =20 +/* + * A test that trying to add the 129th memory block. + * Expect to trigger memblock_double_array() to double the + * memblock.memory.max, find a new valid memory as + * memory.regions. + */ +static int memblock_add_many_check(void) +{ + int i; + void *orig_region; + struct region r =3D { + .base =3D SZ_16K, + .size =3D SZ_16K, + }; + phys_addr_t new_memory_regions_size; + phys_addr_t base, size =3D SZ_64; + phys_addr_t gap_size =3D SZ_64; + + PREFIX_PUSH(); + + reset_memblock_regions(); + memblock_allow_resize(); + + dummy_physical_memory_init(); + /* + * We allocated enough memory by using dummy_physical_memory_init(), and + * split it into small block. First we split a large enough memory block + * as the memory region which will be choosed by memblock_double_array(). + */ + base =3D PAGE_ALIGN(dummy_physical_memory_base()); + new_memory_regions_size =3D PAGE_ALIGN(INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2 * + sizeof(struct memblock_region)); + memblock_add(base, new_memory_regions_size); + + /* This is the base of small memory block. */ + base +=3D new_memory_regions_size + gap_size; + + orig_region =3D memblock.memory.regions; + + for (i =3D 0; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; i++) { + /* + * Add these small block to fulfill the memblock. We keep a + * gap between the nearby memory to avoid being merged. + */ + memblock_add(base, size); + base +=3D size + gap_size; + + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, i + 2); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, new_memory_regions_size + + (i + 1) * size); + } + + /* + * At there, memblock_double_array() has been succeed, check if it + * update the memory.max. + */ + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); + + /* memblock_double_array() will reserve the memory it used. Check it. */ + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, 1); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, new_memory_regions_size); + + /* + * Now memblock_double_array() works fine. Let's check after the + * double_array(), the memblock_add() still works as normal. + */ + memblock_add(r.base, r.size); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.regions[0].base, r.base); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.regions[0].size, r.size); + + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.total_size, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * size + + new_memory_regions_size + + r.size); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.memory.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); + + dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(); + + /* + * The current memory.regions is occupying a range of memory that + * allocated from dummy_physical_memory_init(). After free the memory, + * we must not use it. So restore the origin memory region to make sure + * the tests can run as normal and not affected by the double array. + */ + memblock.memory.regions =3D orig_region; + memblock.memory.cnt =3D INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; + + test_pass_pop(); + + return 0; +} + static int memblock_add_checks(void) { prefix_reset(); @@ -438,6 +530,7 @@ static int memblock_add_checks(void) memblock_add_twice_check(); memblock_add_between_check(); memblock_add_near_max_check(); + memblock_add_many_check(); =20 prefix_pop(); =20 diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c b/tools/testing/memblock= /tests/common.c index 3f795047bbe1..f43b6f414983 100644 --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.c @@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ #include #include =20 -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128 -#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS #define PREFIXES_MAX 15 #define DELIM ": " #define BASIS 10000 @@ -115,6 +113,11 @@ void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void) free(memory_block.base); } =20 +phys_addr_t dummy_physical_memory_base(void) +{ + return (phys_addr_t)memory_block.base; +} + static void usage(const char *prog) { BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(help_opts) !=3D ARRAY_SIZE(long_opts) - 1); diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h b/tools/testing/memblock= /tests/common.h index d6bbbe63bfc3..cc82b85151b6 100644 --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/common.h @@ -10,9 +10,12 @@ #include #include <../selftests/kselftest.h> =20 -#define MEM_SIZE SZ_16K +#define MEM_SIZE SZ_32K #define NUMA_NODES 8 =20 +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS 128 +#define INIT_MEMBLOCK_RESERVED_REGIONS INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + enum test_flags { /* No special request. */ TEST_F_NONE =3D 0x0, @@ -124,6 +127,7 @@ void setup_memblock(void); void setup_numa_memblock(const unsigned int node_fracs[]); void dummy_physical_memory_init(void); void dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(void); +phys_addr_t dummy_physical_memory_base(void); void parse_args(int argc, char **argv); =20 void test_fail(void); --=20 2.34.1 From nobody Sun Feb 8 19:27:36 2026 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF5AC4332F for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:22:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229921AbiJKGWR (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:22:17 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51456 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229822AbiJKGVp (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:21:45 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84A4988A0D for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 23:21:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1665469292; x=1697005292; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OlGIODpv04YEUz28eV6/esNGVmMut18UL3VgBHg/Gxc=; b=dqJXbN/pTUjdhE0g7NlHSkJaCS98ZYvAtd+8SKnMz3cvNrMlYHE4B5eW Ly60rR+LUYHDJ3mUBh3s2pn7Pc+ZgEpZk8jjjGTOJmYzLCUIyksrzl5My duLATrvcWFRAGe6Yb6wJuMeH4xf94ydq2o+wsHRVldzj7dFQex8SD3Szc HyhyDhw/1CBJpDR/+kCWkckw0xiwN7TYQ0A/R85NpgryxJLP/MmjNHes/ uHFckK4VeUgqwjlVPfbw4KeO1aUqimEqs9wfZCZ8aq4aW0/d2UpOxUm0e HWlZqpgSxsTi6U6VteQqmBOOmQButETa6EnW01H9RHCkH8AtyMjLDrjKI A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="284149492" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="284149492" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:20 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="577321991" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="577321991" Received: from q.bj.intel.com ([10.238.154.102]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:18 -0700 From: shaoqin.huang@intel.com To: rppt@kernel.org Cc: Shaoqin Huang , Karolina Drobnik , Rebecca Mckeever , David Hildenbrand , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] memblock test: Add test to memblock_reserve() 129th region Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 14:21:21 +0800 Message-Id: <20221011062128.49359-3-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> References: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Shaoqin Huang Reserve 129th region in the memblock, and this will trigger the memblock_double_array() function, this needs valid memory regions. So using dummy_physical_memory_init() to allocate a valid memory region. At the same time, reserve 128 faked memory region, and make sure these reserved region not intersect with the valid memory region. So memblock_double_array() will choose the valid memory region, and it will success. Also need to restore the reserved.regions after memblock_double_array(), to make sure the subsequent tests can run as normal. Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang --- tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c b/tools/testing/membl= ock/tests/basic_api.c index 4d61a4b474be..c07a1ab0f19b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/tests/basic_api.c @@ -892,6 +892,96 @@ static int memblock_reserve_near_max_check(void) return 0; } =20 +/* + * A test that trying to reserve the 129th memory block. + * Expect to trigger memblock_double_array() to double the + * memblock.memory.max, find a new valid memory as + * reserved.regions. + */ +static int memblock_reserve_many_check(void) +{ + int i; + void *orig_region; + struct region r =3D { + .base =3D SZ_16K, + .size =3D SZ_16K, + }; + phys_addr_t memory_base =3D SZ_128K; + phys_addr_t new_reserved_regions_size; + + PREFIX_PUSH(); + + reset_memblock_regions(); + memblock_allow_resize(); + + /* Add a valid memory region used by double_array(). */ + dummy_physical_memory_init(); + memblock_add(dummy_physical_memory_base(), MEM_SIZE); + + for (i =3D 0; i < INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; i++) { + /* Reserve some fakes memory region to fulfill the memblock. */ + memblock_reserve(memory_base, MEM_SIZE); + + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, i + 1); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, (i + 1) * MEM_SIZE); + + /* Keep the gap so these memory region will not be merged. */ + memory_base +=3D MEM_SIZE * 2; + } + + orig_region =3D memblock.reserved.regions; + + /* This reserve the 129 memory_region, and makes it double array. */ + memblock_reserve(memory_base, MEM_SIZE); + + /* + * This is the memory region size used by the doubled reserved.regions, + * and it has been reserved due to it has been used. The size is used to + * calculate the total_size that the memblock.reserved have now. + */ + new_reserved_regions_size =3D PAGE_ALIGN((INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2) * + sizeof(struct memblock_region)); + /* + * The double_array() will find a free memory region as the new + * reserved.regions, and the used memory region will be reserved, so + * there will be one more region exist in the reserved memblock. And the + * one more reserved region's size is new_reserved_regions_size. + */ + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 2); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1) * MEM= _SIZE + + new_reserved_regions_size); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); + + /* + * Now memblock_double_array() works fine. Let's check after the + * double_array(), the memblock_reserve() still works as normal. + */ + memblock_reserve(r.base, r.size); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.regions[0].base, r.base); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.regions[0].size, r.size); + + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.cnt, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 3); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.total_size, (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1) * MEM= _SIZE + + new_reserved_regions_size + + r.size); + ASSERT_EQ(memblock.reserved.max, INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS * 2); + + dummy_physical_memory_cleanup(); + + /* + * The current reserved.regions is occupying a range of memory that + * allocated from dummy_physical_memory_init(). After free the memory, + * we must not use it. So restore the origin memory region to make sure + * the tests can run as normal and not affected by the double array. + */ + memblock.reserved.regions =3D orig_region; + memblock.reserved.cnt =3D INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS; + + test_pass_pop(); + + return 0; +} + static int memblock_reserve_checks(void) { prefix_reset(); @@ -906,6 +996,7 @@ static int memblock_reserve_checks(void) memblock_reserve_twice_check(); memblock_reserve_between_check(); memblock_reserve_near_max_check(); + memblock_reserve_many_check(); =20 prefix_pop(); =20 --=20 2.34.1 From nobody Sun Feb 8 19:27:36 2026 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D53DCC433FE for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:22:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229968AbiJKGWZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:22:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52054 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229785AbiJKGVr (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:21:47 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8179388DF3 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 23:21:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1665469293; x=1697005293; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=daaV3WZWukjbgGvbQ73mOCe8nI4eaN3LDyARuyKPkhs=; b=ByuPlgddCmgqfX3Ubtch4r85kAcf5gII3xFwhlqQ09JR9u91jIT+KpMI HZgONM5e+wRAfbm9S1D50j8Mlru9BmEcdNEebZQNqfb7qPkur6i7X+pQ3 wdNEbD3nGtvgqDvi9VX3XdQZymv4YGmZ89waJ3wLJlcVguH09DOrfCVAU PYBtIT2bnWe1Bf68c64Cw1wBrookKSgQM9ePLLiZOhbWxw7PC9koAwOLi iUUd1nv9SNxDk1FFVPpqMhGFvXOFpEV7D5laUP/qCWWn9JYgmD6M6N6nb R+zPtGl31sJcpS5dQwuZt3IxJFTEFP5WSQPxnY6xowF60JxAfrFZTzJ2k Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="284149504" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="284149504" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:22 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="577321998" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,175,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="577321998" Received: from q.bj.intel.com ([10.238.154.102]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2022 23:21:20 -0700 From: shaoqin.huang@intel.com To: rppt@kernel.org Cc: Shaoqin Huang , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH v4 3/3] memblock test: Update TODO list Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 14:21:22 +0800 Message-Id: <20221011062128.49359-4-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> References: <20221011062128.49359-1-shaoqin.huang@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Shaoqin Huang Remove the completed items from TODO list. Signed-off-by: Shaoqin Huang --- tools/testing/memblock/TODO | 11 ++--------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/memblock/TODO b/tools/testing/memblock/TODO index 33044c634ea7..503cc96fcdc3 100644 --- a/tools/testing/memblock/TODO +++ b/tools/testing/memblock/TODO @@ -1,17 +1,10 @@ TODO =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =20 -1. Add tests trying to memblock_add() or memblock_reserve() 129th region. - This will trigger memblock_double_array(), make sure it succeeds. - *Important:* These tests require valid memory ranges, use dummy physical - memory block from common.c to implement them. It is also v= ery - likely that the current MEM_SIZE won't be enough for these - test cases. Use realloc to adjust the size accordingly. - -2. Add test cases using this functions (implement them for both directions= ): +1. Add test cases using this functions (implement them for both directions= ): + memblock_alloc_raw() + memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw() + memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw() =20 -3. Add tests for memblock_alloc_node() to check if the correct NUMA node i= s set +2. Add tests for memblock_alloc_node() to check if the correct NUMA node i= s set for the new region --=20 2.34.1