Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] mm: selftests: Add shmem into memory failure test

On 8/23/26 21:40, Lisa Wang wrote:
> Add a shmem memory failure selftest to test the shmem memory failure is
> correct after modifying shmem return value.
> 
> Specifically, test the expected behavior under various scenarios
> combining page dirtiness (dirty vs clean) and failure types (hard vs
> soft):
> + Dirty + Hard: Trigger a SIGBUS on injection, and trigger another
>   SIGBUS when reading the page again.
> + Dirty + Soft: No SIGBUS is triggered, and the original value can be
>   read successfully.
> + Clean + Hard: No SIGBUS is triggered on injection, but trigger a
>   SIGBUS when trying to read the page again.
> + Clean + Soft: No SIGBUS is triggered, and the page can be read
>   successfully.
> 
> Acked-by: Miaohe Lin <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Lisa Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c | 118 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 115 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 1a5a32e22cce..5b26f0c44664 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,10 @@
>  
>  #include "vm_util.h"
>  
> +#ifndef fallthrough
> +# define fallthrough __attribute__((__fallthrough__))
> +#endif

This doesn't belong into this test.

rseq/rseq.c selftest already uses it.

I think tools/testing/include/ already provides it.

Maybe

	#include <linux/compiler.h>

does the trick?



-- 
Cheers,

David