[LTP] [PATCH v3 1/4] Hugetlb: Add new tst_test options for hugeltb test support

[Li Wang]

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:54 PM Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote:

> Hi!
> > Why not consider encapsulating these two new fields in 'struct
> > tst_hugepage' ?
> >
> > Then the tst_test in the case can simply initialize to:
> >
> > ....
> > static struct tst_test test = {
> >     .needs_root = 1,
> >     .taint_check = TST_TAINT_D | TST_TAINT_W,
> >     .setup = setup,
> >     .test_all = run_test,
> >     .hugepages = {1, TST_NEEDS, 1, 1},
> > };
>
> I do not like that we have magic constants in the .hugepages that are
> not self describing. I would treat the hugetltbfs just as we treat
> devfs, that would be:
>
> #define MNTPOINT "hugetlbfs/"
> #define HUGEFILE MNTPOINT "hugefile"
>
> static int huge_fd;
>
> static void setup(void)
> {
>         huge_fd = tst_creat_unlinked(HUGEFILE);
>         ...
> }
>
> static void cleanup(void)
> {
>         if (huge_fd > 0)
>                 SAFE_CLOSE(huge_fd);
> }
>
> static struct tst_test test = {
>         ...
>         .mntpoint = MNTPOINT,
>         .needs_hugetlbfs = 1,
>         .setup = setup,
>         .cleanup = cleanup,
>         ...
> }
>
>
> What do you think?
>

+1 Looks good, this treats it as an FS and is separated from the hugepage
usage.


-- 
Regards,
Li Wang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20221101/5882ef09/attachment.htm>