From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: tj@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org,
shakeelb@google.com, kernel-team@fb.com, void@manifault.com
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] cgroup: Account for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events()
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:57:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220422155728.3055914-4-void@manifault.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220422155728.3055914-1-void@manifault.com>
The test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() testcase in the cgroup memcg tests
validates that processes in a group that perform allocations exceeding
memory.oom.group are killed. It also validates that the
memory.events.oom_kill events are properly propagated in this case. Commit
06e11c907ea4 ("kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events test")
fixed test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() to account for the fact that the
memory.events.oom_kill events in a child cgroup is propagated up to its
parent. This behavior can actually be configured by the memory_localevents
mount option, so this patch updates the testcase to properly account for
the possible presence of this mount option.
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
---
.../testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
index ea2fd27e52df..d88e0ca3f3d1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include "../kselftest.h"
#include "cgroup_util.h"
+static bool has_localevents;
static bool has_recursiveprot;
/*
@@ -1091,6 +1092,7 @@ static int test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events(const char *root)
{
int ret = KSFT_FAIL;
char *parent, *child;
+ long parent_oom_events;
parent = cg_name(root, "memcg_test_0");
child = cg_name(root, "memcg_test_0/memcg_test_1");
@@ -1128,7 +1130,15 @@ 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)
+ parent_oom_events = cg_read_key_long(
+ parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ");
+ // If memory_localevents is not enabled (the default), the parent should
+ // count OOM events in its children groups. Otherwise, it should not
+ // have observed any events.
+ if (has_localevents) {
+ if (parent_oom_events != 0)
+ goto cleanup;
+ } else if (parent_oom_events <= 0)
goto cleanup;
ret = KSFT_PASS;
@@ -1298,6 +1308,11 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
ksft_exit_skip("Failed to query cgroup mount option\n");
has_recursiveprot = proc_status;
+ proc_status = proc_mount_contains("memory_localevents");
+ if (proc_status < 0)
+ ksft_exit_skip("Failed to query cgroup mount option\n");
+ has_localevents = proc_status;
+
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); i++) {
switch (tests[i].fn(root)) {
case KSFT_PASS:
--
2.30.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-22 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-22 15:57 [PATCH 0/5] Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests David Vernet
2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 1/5] cgroups: Refactor children cgroups in memcg tests David Vernet
2022-04-22 23:04 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-23 11:30 ` David Vernet
2022-04-23 15:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-23 15:33 ` David Vernet
2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 2/5] cgroup: Account for memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low() David Vernet
2022-04-22 23:06 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-23 11:33 ` David Vernet
2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet [this message]
2022-04-22 23:14 ` [PATCH 3/5] cgroup: Account for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() Roman Gushchin
2022-04-23 11:36 ` David Vernet
2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 4/5] cgroup: Removing racy check in test_memcg_sock() David Vernet
2022-04-22 23:50 ` Roman Gushchin
2022-04-23 11:50 ` David Vernet
2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 5/5] cgroup: Fix racy check in alloc_pagecache_max_30M() helper function David Vernet
2022-04-22 23:56 ` 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=20220422155728.3055914-4-void@manifault.com \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--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