On Wed Jan 22, 2025 at 10:27 AM EST, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 22.01.25 16:16, Zi Yan wrote:
On Wed Jan 22, 2025 at 9:26 AM EST, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 22.01.25 13:40, Zi Yan wrote:
Commit acd7ccb284b8 ("mm: shmem: add large folio support for tmpfs") changes huge=always to allocate THP/mTHP based on write size and split_huge_page_test does not write PMD size data, so file-back THP is not created during the test.
Just curious, why can't we write PMD size data instead, to avoid messing with the "force" option?
It also works. I used "force", because I notice that it is intended for testing. Using it might be more future proof, in case huge=always changes its semantics again in the future.
I recall discussing with Hugh in an upstream call that "force" is a relict from older times, so naturally I would have just adjusted the test case to trigger the PMD scenario. No strong opinion, though, was just wondering.
Got it. Let me change it and resend. Thank you for the feedback.