From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events test
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 07:08:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220415140817.ljznpvacne6nchg5@dev0025.ash9.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220415000133.3955987-2-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 05:01:30PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events") made
> memory.events recursive: all events are propagated upwards by the
> tree. It was a change in semantics.
In one of our offline discussions you mentioned that we may want to
consider having the test take mount options into account. If we decide to
go that route we should probably have this testcase take memory_localevents
into account as well. If so, I'm happy to take care of that in a follow-on
patch after this is merged as I already have a patch locally that reads and
parses /proc/mounts to detect these mount options.
>
> It broke the oom group leaf events test: it assumes that after
> an OOM the oom_kill counter is zero on parent's level.
>
> Let's adjust the test: it should have similar expectations
> for the child and parent levels.
>
> The test passes after this fix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
> index 36ccf2322e21..00b430e7f2a2 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
> @@ -1079,7 +1079,8 @@ static int test_memcg_sock(const char *root)
> /*
> * This test disables swapping and tries to allocate anonymous memory
> * up to OOM with memory.group.oom set. Then it checks that all
> - * processes in the leaf (but not the parent) were killed.
> + * processes in the leaf were killed. It also checks that oom_events
> + * were propagated to the parent level.
> */
> static int test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events(const char *root)
> {
> @@ -1122,7 +1123,7 @@ static int test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events(const char *root)
> if (cg_read_key_long(child, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") <= 0)
> goto cleanup;
>
> - if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") != 0)
> + if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") <= 0)
> goto cleanup;
>
> ret = KSFT_PASS;
> --
> 2.35.1
>
Looks good, thanks.
Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-15 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-15 0:01 [PATCH 0/4] mm: memcg kselftests fixes Roman Gushchin
2022-04-15 0:01 ` [PATCH 1/4] kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events test Roman Gushchin
2022-04-15 14:08 ` David Vernet [this message]
2022-04-15 15:59 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-15 0:01 ` [PATCH 2/4] kselftests: memcg: speed up the memory.high test Roman Gushchin
2022-04-15 14:11 ` David Vernet
2022-04-15 0:01 ` [PATCH 3/4] MAINTAINERS: add corresponding kselftests to cgroup entry Roman Gushchin
2022-04-21 19:25 ` Tejun Heo
2022-04-21 20:16 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-15 0:01 ` [PATCH 4/4] MAINTAINERS: add corresponding kselftests to memcg entry Roman Gushchin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220415140817.ljznpvacne6nchg5@dev0025.ash9.facebook.com \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox