This is where they belong, and this makes it cleaner to apply a
follow-up fix to the uffd builds.
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile | 7 +-
tools/testing/selftests/mm/hugepage-mremap.c | 2 +-
.../selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c | 2 +-
tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++
tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.h | 12 +-
tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.c | 104 -----------------
tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.h | 10 --
7 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 120 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile
index 473bf1811552..9bf3305b7dea 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile
@@ -109,8 +109,11 @@ include ../lib.mk
$(TEST_GEN_PROGS): vm_util.c
-$(OUTPUT)/uffd-stress: uffd-common.c
-$(OUTPUT)/uffd-unit-tests: uffd-common.c
+$(OUTPUT)/uffd-stress: uffd-common.c
+$(OUTPUT)/uffd-unit-tests: uffd-common.c
+$(OUTPUT)/hugepage-mremap: uffd-common.c
+$(OUTPUT)/write_to_hugetlbfs: uffd-common.c
+$(OUTPUT)/ksm_functional_tests: uffd-common.c
ifeq ($(MACHINE),x86_64)
BINARIES_32 := $(patsubst %,$(OUTPUT)/%,$(BINARIES_32))
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/hugepage-mremap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/hugepage-mremap.c
index cabd0084f57b..8158fe909f5e 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/hugepage-mremap.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/hugepage-mremap.c
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
#include <sys/ioctl.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
-#include "vm_util.h"
+#include "uffd-common.h"
#define DEFAULT_LENGTH_MB 10UL
#define MB_TO_BYTES(x) (x * 1024 * 1024)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
index 26853badae70..648188ad73fa 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/ksm_functional_tests.c
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
#include <linux/userfaultfd.h>
#include "../kselftest.h"
-#include "vm_util.h"
+#include "uffd-common.h"
#define KiB 1024u
#define MiB (1024 * KiB)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.c
index 61c6250adf93..e1ad63668a05 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
*/
#include "uffd-common.h"
+#include "vm_util.h"
#define BASE_PMD_ADDR ((void *)(1UL << 30))
@@ -616,3 +617,107 @@ int copy_page(int ufd, unsigned long offset, bool wp)
{
return __copy_page(ufd, offset, false, wp);
}
+
+/* If `ioctls' non-NULL, the allowed ioctls will be returned into the var */
+int uffd_register_with_ioctls(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
+ bool miss, bool wp, bool minor, uint64_t *ioctls)
+{
+ struct uffdio_register uffdio_register = { 0 };
+ uint64_t mode = 0;
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ if (miss)
+ mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_MISSING;
+ if (wp)
+ mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_WP;
+ if (minor)
+ mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_MINOR;
+
+ uffdio_register.range.start = (unsigned long)addr;
+ uffdio_register.range.len = len;
+ uffdio_register.mode = mode;
+
+ if (ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_REGISTER, &uffdio_register) == -1)
+ ret = -errno;
+ else if (ioctls)
+ *ioctls = uffdio_register.ioctls;
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+int uffd_register(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
+ bool miss, bool wp, bool minor)
+{
+ return uffd_register_with_ioctls(uffd, addr, len,
+ miss, wp, minor, NULL);
+}
+
+int uffd_unregister(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len)
+{
+ struct uffdio_range range = { .start = (uintptr_t)addr, .len = len };
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ if (ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_UNREGISTER, &range) == -1)
+ ret = -errno;
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+int uffd_open_dev(unsigned int flags)
+{
+ int fd, uffd;
+
+ fd = open("/dev/userfaultfd", O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC);
+ if (fd < 0)
+ return fd;
+ uffd = ioctl(fd, USERFAULTFD_IOC_NEW, flags);
+ close(fd);
+
+ return uffd;
+}
+
+int uffd_open_sys(unsigned int flags)
+{
+#ifdef __NR_userfaultfd
+ return syscall(__NR_userfaultfd, flags);
+#else
+ return -1;
+#endif
+}
+
+int uffd_open(unsigned int flags)
+{
+ int uffd = uffd_open_sys(flags);
+
+ if (uffd < 0)
+ uffd = uffd_open_dev(flags);
+
+ return uffd;
+}
+
+int uffd_get_features(uint64_t *features)
+{
+ struct uffdio_api uffdio_api = { .api = UFFD_API, .features = 0 };
+ /*
+ * This should by default work in most kernels; the feature list
+ * will be the same no matter what we pass in here.
+ */
+ int fd = uffd_open(UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY);
+
+ if (fd < 0)
+ /* Maybe the kernel is older than user-only mode? */
+ fd = uffd_open(0);
+
+ if (fd < 0)
+ return fd;
+
+ if (ioctl(fd, UFFDIO_API, &uffdio_api)) {
+ close(fd);
+ return -errno;
+ }
+
+ *features = uffdio_api.features;
+ close(fd);
+
+ return 0;
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.h b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.h
index 6068f2346b86..a1cdb78c0762 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/uffd-common.h
@@ -19,8 +19,6 @@
#include <signal.h>
#include <poll.h>
#include <string.h>
-#include <linux/mman.h>
-#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <sys/ioctl.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
@@ -110,6 +108,16 @@ int __copy_page(int ufd, unsigned long offset, bool retry, bool wp);
int copy_page(int ufd, unsigned long offset, bool wp);
void *uffd_poll_thread(void *arg);
+int uffd_register(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
+ bool miss, bool wp, bool minor);
+int uffd_unregister(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len);
+int uffd_open_dev(unsigned int flags);
+int uffd_open_sys(unsigned int flags);
+int uffd_open(unsigned int flags);
+int uffd_get_features(uint64_t *features);
+int uffd_register_with_ioctls(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
+ bool miss, bool wp, bool minor, uint64_t *ioctls);
+
#define TEST_ANON 1
#define TEST_HUGETLB 2
#define TEST_SHMEM 3
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.c
index 01296c17df02..c64a0134f83c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.c
@@ -198,110 +198,6 @@ unsigned long default_huge_page_size(void)
return hps;
}
-/* If `ioctls' non-NULL, the allowed ioctls will be returned into the var */
-int uffd_register_with_ioctls(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
- bool miss, bool wp, bool minor, uint64_t *ioctls)
-{
- struct uffdio_register uffdio_register = { 0 };
- uint64_t mode = 0;
- int ret = 0;
-
- if (miss)
- mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_MISSING;
- if (wp)
- mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_WP;
- if (minor)
- mode |= UFFDIO_REGISTER_MODE_MINOR;
-
- uffdio_register.range.start = (unsigned long)addr;
- uffdio_register.range.len = len;
- uffdio_register.mode = mode;
-
- if (ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_REGISTER, &uffdio_register) == -1)
- ret = -errno;
- else if (ioctls)
- *ioctls = uffdio_register.ioctls;
-
- return ret;
-}
-
-int uffd_register(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
- bool miss, bool wp, bool minor)
-{
- return uffd_register_with_ioctls(uffd, addr, len,
- miss, wp, minor, NULL);
-}
-
-int uffd_unregister(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len)
-{
- struct uffdio_range range = { .start = (uintptr_t)addr, .len = len };
- int ret = 0;
-
- if (ioctl(uffd, UFFDIO_UNREGISTER, &range) == -1)
- ret = -errno;
-
- return ret;
-}
-
-int uffd_open_dev(unsigned int flags)
-{
- int fd, uffd;
-
- fd = open("/dev/userfaultfd", O_RDWR | O_CLOEXEC);
- if (fd < 0)
- return fd;
- uffd = ioctl(fd, USERFAULTFD_IOC_NEW, flags);
- close(fd);
-
- return uffd;
-}
-
-int uffd_open_sys(unsigned int flags)
-{
-#ifdef __NR_userfaultfd
- return syscall(__NR_userfaultfd, flags);
-#else
- return -1;
-#endif
-}
-
-int uffd_open(unsigned int flags)
-{
- int uffd = uffd_open_sys(flags);
-
- if (uffd < 0)
- uffd = uffd_open_dev(flags);
-
- return uffd;
-}
-
-int uffd_get_features(uint64_t *features)
-{
- struct uffdio_api uffdio_api = { .api = UFFD_API, .features = 0 };
- /*
- * This should by default work in most kernels; the feature list
- * will be the same no matter what we pass in here.
- */
- int fd = uffd_open(UFFD_USER_MODE_ONLY);
-
- if (fd < 0)
- /* Maybe the kernel is older than user-only mode? */
- fd = uffd_open(0);
-
- if (fd < 0)
- return fd;
-
- if (ioctl(fd, UFFDIO_API, &uffdio_api)) {
- close(fd);
- return -errno;
- }
-
- *features = uffdio_api.features;
- close(fd);
-
- return 0;
-}
-
unsigned int psize(void)
{
if (!__page_size)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.h b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.h
index 232ffeb5805c..7f5aac0ac680 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/vm_util.h
@@ -33,16 +33,6 @@ bool check_huge_shmem(void *addr, int nr_hpages, uint64_t hpage_size);
int64_t allocate_transhuge(void *ptr, int pagemap_fd);
unsigned long default_huge_page_size(void);
-int uffd_register(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
- bool miss, bool wp, bool minor);
-int uffd_unregister(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len);
-int uffd_open_dev(unsigned int flags);
-int uffd_open_sys(unsigned int flags);
-int uffd_open(unsigned int flags);
-int uffd_get_features(uint64_t *features);
-int uffd_register_with_ioctls(int uffd, void *addr, uint64_t len,
- bool miss, bool wp, bool minor, uint64_t *ioctls);
-
/*
* On ppc64 this will only work with radix 2M hugepage size
*/
--
2.40.1On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 06:33:56PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: > This is where they belong, and this makes it cleaner to apply a > follow-up fix to the uffd builds. > > Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> Thanks for further looking into this. I'm fine to move it over if you think proper, but just to mention I had those in vm_utils.h just because I left all uffd specific tests shared code in uffd-common.h, so my plan was uffd-common.h shouldn't be included in most test cases except uffd tests. I'm not sure whether we can just make your next patch of "ifndef.." into vm_utils.h to avoid the movement, or is it a must? Thanks, -- Peter Xu
On 6/2/23 08:59, Peter Xu wrote: > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 06:33:56PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: >> This is where they belong, and this makes it cleaner to apply a >> follow-up fix to the uffd builds. >> >> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> > > Thanks for further looking into this. > > I'm fine to move it over if you think proper, but just to mention I had > those in vm_utils.h just because I left all uffd specific tests shared code > in uffd-common.h, so my plan was uffd-common.h shouldn't be included in > most test cases except uffd tests. I think we're in agreement that we want to only include uffd-common.h where it's actually required. Likewise with the uffd*() routines. So I would like to still move this over, yes, just to have things in their best-named location. > > I'm not sure whether we can just make your next patch of "ifndef.." into > vm_utils.h to avoid the movement, or is it a must? > Actually, I think I can drop the next patch entirely, based on Muhammad's observation that we should be doing a "make headers" to pull in those items. I'll have more to say over on that thread. thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA
On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 03:11:52PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: > On 6/2/23 08:59, Peter Xu wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 06:33:56PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: > > > This is where they belong, and this makes it cleaner to apply a > > > follow-up fix to the uffd builds. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com> > > > > Thanks for further looking into this. > > > > I'm fine to move it over if you think proper, but just to mention I had > > those in vm_utils.h just because I left all uffd specific tests shared code > > in uffd-common.h, so my plan was uffd-common.h shouldn't be included in > > most test cases except uffd tests. > > I think we're in agreement that we want to only include uffd-common.h > where it's actually required. Likewise with the uffd*() routines. So I > would like to still move this over, yes, just to have things in their > best-named location. Sorry I didn't get it - e.g. I'm confused why we need to export uffd_test_ops into ksm unit test, it doesn't make much sense to me.. If you think vm_util.h is a name too common to contain uffd helpers, shall we create another vm_util_uffd.h just to put the uffd helpers? Just see what's there in uffd-common.h, which is still ugly (I could look into it some other day): extern unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; extern char *area_src, *area_src_alias, *area_dst, *area_dst_alias, *area_remap; extern int uffd, uffd_flags, finished, *pipefd, test_type; extern bool map_shared; extern bool test_uffdio_wp; extern unsigned long long *count_verify; extern volatile bool test_uffdio_copy_eexist; extern uffd_test_ops_t anon_uffd_test_ops; extern uffd_test_ops_t shmem_uffd_test_ops; extern uffd_test_ops_t hugetlb_uffd_test_ops; extern uffd_test_ops_t *uffd_test_ops; and more. That's why I think this header should not better be included by anyone else besides uffd-stress.c and uffd-unit-tests.c for now. > > > > > I'm not sure whether we can just make your next patch of "ifndef.." into > > vm_utils.h to avoid the movement, or is it a must? > > > > Actually, I think I can drop the next patch entirely, based on > Muhammad's observation that we should be doing a "make headers" > to pull in those items. I'll have more to say over on that thread. Sure, great if the local headers will work. Thanks. -- Peter Xu
On 6/2/23 15:38, Peter Xu wrote: ... >>> I'm fine to move it over if you think proper, but just to mention I had >>> those in vm_utils.h just because I left all uffd specific tests shared code >>> in uffd-common.h, so my plan was uffd-common.h shouldn't be included in >>> most test cases except uffd tests. >> >> I think we're in agreement that we want to only include uffd-common.h >> where it's actually required. Likewise with the uffd*() routines. So I >> would like to still move this over, yes, just to have things in their >> best-named location. > > Sorry I didn't get it - e.g. I'm confused why we need to export > uffd_test_ops into ksm unit test, it doesn't make much sense to me.. Oh, I see what you mean, finally. Yes. ksm should not need that. > > If you think vm_util.h is a name too common to contain uffd helpers, shall Right, given the presence of uffd-common.[chg], I really want to avoid putting the uffd helpers somewhere else... > we create another vm_util_uffd.h just to put the uffd helpers? > > Just see what's there in uffd-common.h, which is still ugly (I could look > into it some other day): Good point. > > extern unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; > extern char *area_src, *area_src_alias, *area_dst, *area_dst_alias, *area_remap; > extern int uffd, uffd_flags, finished, *pipefd, test_type; > extern bool map_shared; > extern bool test_uffdio_wp; > extern unsigned long long *count_verify; > extern volatile bool test_uffdio_copy_eexist; > > extern uffd_test_ops_t anon_uffd_test_ops; > extern uffd_test_ops_t shmem_uffd_test_ops; > extern uffd_test_ops_t hugetlb_uffd_test_ops; > extern uffd_test_ops_t *uffd_test_ops; > > and more. > > That's why I think this header should not better be included by anyone else > besides uffd-stress.c and uffd-unit-tests.c for now. > OK, I think I can arrange things to meet that requirement. Let me take another shot at it. thanks, -- John Hubbard NVIDIA
On 6/2/23 15:52, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 6/2/23 15:38, Peter Xu wrote:
> ...
>>> I think we're in agreement that we want to only include uffd-common.h
>>> where it's actually required. Likewise with the uffd*() routines. So I
>>> would like to still move this over, yes, just to have things in their
>>> best-named location.
>>
>> Sorry I didn't get it - e.g. I'm confused why we need to export
>> uffd_test_ops into ksm unit test, it doesn't make much sense to me..
>
> Oh, I see what you mean, finally. Yes. ksm should not need that.
>
...whoops, correction, our very own David Hildenbrand recently made
changes that contradict the claim that "ksm and uffd selftests are
independent". In fact, ksm now *intentionally* depends upon uffd, as of
commit 93fb70aa5904c ("selftests/vm: add KSM unmerge tests"), aha!
That added commit added a call to test_unmerge_uffd_wp(), to
ksm_functional_tests.c .
So this needs to stay approximately as-is, it seems.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 05:43:19PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 6/2/23 15:52, John Hubbard wrote:
> > On 6/2/23 15:38, Peter Xu wrote:
> > ...
> > > > I think we're in agreement that we want to only include uffd-common.h
> > > > where it's actually required. Likewise with the uffd*() routines. So I
> > > > would like to still move this over, yes, just to have things in their
> > > > best-named location.
> > >
> > > Sorry I didn't get it - e.g. I'm confused why we need to export
> > > uffd_test_ops into ksm unit test, it doesn't make much sense to me..
> >
> > Oh, I see what you mean, finally. Yes. ksm should not need that.
> >
>
> ...whoops, correction, our very own David Hildenbrand recently made
> changes that contradict the claim that "ksm and uffd selftests are
> independent". In fact, ksm now *intentionally* depends upon uffd, as of
> commit 93fb70aa5904c ("selftests/vm: add KSM unmerge tests"), aha!
>
> That added commit added a call to test_unmerge_uffd_wp(), to
> ksm_functional_tests.c .
>
> So this needs to stay approximately as-is, it seems.
So I think it depends on what is "as-is" to me in the above sentence. :)
test_unmerge_uffd_wp() impled its own uffd ioctls, and it still doesn't use
any of uffd-common.h of now (e.g. uffd_test_ops).
IMHO if we want we can let test_unmerge_uffd_wp() reuse either
uffd_get_features(), uffd_open(), uffd_register() etc., but still all of
them are provided by vm_util.h not uffd-common.h for now, and that's
intended (vm_util.h can contain uffd helpers, or whatever helpers as long
as generic mm/ unit tests need).
We can even move wp_range() from uffd-common.[ch] into vm_utils.[ch], then
it can also share that (need to replace err(), that's uffd-common
specific). Not necessary anything must be done in this series, though.
Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
On 6/2/23 18:18, Peter Xu wrote:
...
>> ...whoops, correction, our very own David Hildenbrand recently made
>> changes that contradict the claim that "ksm and uffd selftests are
>> independent". In fact, ksm now *intentionally* depends upon uffd, as of
>> commit 93fb70aa5904c ("selftests/vm: add KSM unmerge tests"), aha!
>>
>> That added commit added a call to test_unmerge_uffd_wp(), to
>> ksm_functional_tests.c .
>>
>> So this needs to stay approximately as-is, it seems.
>
> So I think it depends on what is "as-is" to me in the above sentence. :)
>
> test_unmerge_uffd_wp() impled its own uffd ioctls, and it still doesn't use
> any of uffd-common.h of now (e.g. uffd_test_ops).
>
> IMHO if we want we can let test_unmerge_uffd_wp() reuse either
> uffd_get_features(), uffd_open(), uffd_register() etc., but still all of
> them are provided by vm_util.h not uffd-common.h for now, and that's
> intended (vm_util.h can contain uffd helpers, or whatever helpers as long
> as generic mm/ unit tests need).
ksm_functional_tests.c calls uffd_register(). That's about as clear
as it gets: this file distinctly depends upon uffd test functionality.
The goal here is to put uffd*() routines into uffd-common.[ch], and
everything else into vm_utils.[ch]. Because that's what you do, when you
have such named files.
Putting uffd*() routines somewhere other than uffd-common.* requires
some...reason. And all I've heard so far is, "it was already
scrambled--as intended, don't mess with it!" :)
>
> We can even move wp_range() from uffd-common.[ch] into vm_utils.[ch], then
> it can also share that (need to replace err(), that's uffd-common
> specific). Not necessary anything must be done in this series, though.
>
But wp_range(), despite its generic-sounding name, is another example of
something that remains tightly coupled to the uffd code: it uses
UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT to get its work done.
So I'd recommend leaving this one in uffd-common.c.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.