On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 15:48:04 -0400 Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Tests > ===== > > What I did test: > > - cross-build tests that I normally cover [1] > > - smoke tested on x86_64 the simplest program [2] on dev_dax 1G PUD > mprotect() using QEMU's nvdimm emulations [3] and ndctl to create > namespaces with proper alignments, which used to throw "bad pud" but now > it'll run through all fine. I checked sigbus happens if with illegal > access on protected puds. > > - vmtests. > > What I didn't test: > > - fsdax: I wanted to also give it a shot, but only until then I noticed it > doesn't seem to be supported (according to dax_iomap_fault(), which will > always fallback on PUD_ORDER). I did remember it was supported before, I > could miss something important there.. please shoot if so. OK. Who are you addressing this question to? > - userfault wp-async: I also wanted to test userfault-wp async be able to > split huge puds (here it's simply a clear_pud.. though), but it won't > work for devdax anyway due to not allowed to do smaller than 1G faults in > this case. So skip too. Sounds OK. So that's an additional project if anyone cares enough? > - Power, as no hardware on hand. Hopefully the powerpc people can help with that. What tests do you ask that they run?
