[PATCH] drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[PATCH] drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[Matthew Auld]

On pool init we should expect the lru_count for each node to be zeroed
as per __list_lru_init -> init_one_lru, but here we are asserting the
opposite.

Currently our CI is blowing up with:

10:23:33] # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
[10:23:33] Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true
[10:23:33] [FAILED] DMA allocations, DMA32 required
[10:23:33] [PASSED] No DMA allocations, DMA32 required
[10:23:33]     # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
[10:23:33]     Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true

Fixes: 444e2a19d7fd ("ttm/pool: port to list_lru. (v2)")
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
index db4b4a09a73f..8bcac84e9846 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static void ttm_device_init_pools(struct kunit *test)
 
 				if (ttm_pool_uses_dma_alloc(pool))
 					KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test,
-							   !list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
+							   list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
 			}
 		}
 	}
-- 
2.53.0

Re: drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[Knop, Ryszard]

LGTM, verified locally this fixes 2 KUnit errors. A few missing
expected subtests still remain though.

Reviewed-by: Ryszard Knop <ryszard.knop@intel.com>

On Thu, 2026-04-09 at 12:10 +0100, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On pool init we should expect the lru_count for each node to be zeroed
> as per __list_lru_init -> init_one_lru, but here we are asserting the
> opposite.
> 
> Currently our CI is blowing up with:
> 
> 10:23:33] # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
> [10:23:33] Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true
> [10:23:33] [FAILED] DMA allocations, DMA32 required
> [10:23:33] [PASSED] No DMA allocations, DMA32 required
> [10:23:33]     # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
> [10:23:33]     Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true
> 
> Fixes: 444e2a19d7fd ("ttm/pool: port to list_lru. (v2)")
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> index db4b4a09a73f..8bcac84e9846 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static void ttm_device_init_pools(struct kunit *test)
>  
>  				if (ttm_pool_uses_dma_alloc(pool))
>  					KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test,
> -							   !list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
> +							   list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
>  			}
>  		}
>  	}

Re: [PATCH] drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[Christian König]

On 4/9/26 13:10, Matthew Auld wrote:
> On pool init we should expect the lru_count for each node to be zeroed
> as per __list_lru_init -> init_one_lru, but here we are asserting the
> opposite.
> 
> Currently our CI is blowing up with:
> 
> 10:23:33] # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
> [10:23:33] Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true
> [10:23:33] [FAILED] DMA allocations, DMA32 required
> [10:23:33] [PASSED] No DMA allocations, DMA32 required
> [10:23:33]     # ttm_device_init_pools: ASSERTION FAILED at drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178
> [10:23:33]     Expected !list_lru_count(&pt.pages) to be false, but is true
> 
> Fixes: 444e2a19d7fd ("ttm/pool: port to list_lru. (v2)")
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>

Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> index db4b4a09a73f..8bcac84e9846 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static void ttm_device_init_pools(struct kunit *test)
>  
>  				if (ttm_pool_uses_dma_alloc(pool))
>  					KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test,
> -							   !list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
> +							   list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
>  			}
>  		}
>  	}

Claude review: drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[Claude Code Review Bot]

Overall Series Review

Subject: drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT
Author: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Patches: 2
Reviewed: 2026-04-12T11:28:14.294748

---

This is a single-patch fix for a logic bug in the TTM pool KUnit test. The fix is straightforward and correct: a double-negation in an assertion was causing the test to assert the opposite of what was intended. The commit message is clear, includes CI failure output demonstrating the problem, and has the appropriate `Fixes:` tag.

**Verdict: Looks good.**

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer

Claude review: drm/ttm/tests: fix lru_count ASSERT

[Claude Code Review Bot]

Patch Review

**The bug:** After pool initialization via `__list_lru_init -> init_one_lru`, the LRU count for each node should be zero. The original assertion had a spurious `!` negation:

```c
KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test,
                   !list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
```

`KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test, !list_lru_count(...))` means "assert that `!count` is false", which is equivalent to "assert count is **non-zero**". That's the opposite of what the test intended — it should be verifying the LRU is empty after initialization.

**The fix:** Removing the `!` gives:

```c
KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE(test,
                   list_lru_count(&pt.pages));
```

This correctly asserts that `list_lru_count(&pt.pages)` is zero (falsy), matching the expected post-init state.

I confirmed that the kernel tree at `drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_device_test.c:178-179` already has the corrected version (without the `!`), consistent with this fix having been applied on drm-next.

**Minor style observation:** Using `KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, list_lru_count(&pt.pages), 0)` would make the intent unambiguous and avoid future confusion with negation, but the existing form is fine and consistent with current test style.

**Reviewed-by worthy:** Yes. The fix is correct, minimal, and well-described. The `Fixes:` tag is appropriate (references `444e2a19d7fd` which ported ttm/pool to list_lru and introduced this test).

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer