From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: "Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Roman Gushchin" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"Shakeel Butt" <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
"Muchun Song" <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>, "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
"Sean Christopherson" <seanjc@google.com>,
"James Houghton" <jthoughton@google.com>,
"Sebastian Chlad" <sebastianchlad@gmail.com>,
"Guopeng Zhang" <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>,
"Li Wang" <liwan@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] selftests: memcg: Fix test_memcontrol test failures with large page sizes
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 19:43:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260319194347.1048fc8d737b6e8f9d82663d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260319173752.1472864-1-longman@redhat.com>
On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 13:37:45 -0400 Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> wrote:
> There are a number of test failures with the running of the
> test_memcontrol selftest on a 128-core arm64 system on kernels with
> 4k/16k/64k page sizes. This patch series makes some minor changes to
> the kernel and the test_memcontrol selftest to address these failures.
>
> The first kernel patch scales the memcg vmstats flush threshold
> logarithmetically instead of linearly with the total number of CPUs. The
> second kernel patch scale down MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH with increases in page
> size. These 2 patches help to reduce the discrepancies between the
> reported usage data with the real ones.
>
> The next 5 test_memcontrol selftest patches adjust the testing code to
> greatly reduce the chance that it will report failure, though some
> occasional failures is still possible.
>
> To verify the changes, the test_memcontrol selftest was run 100
> times each on a 128-core arm64 system on kernels with 4k/16k/64k
> page sizes. No failure was observed other than some failures of the
> test_memcg_reclaim test when running on a 16k page size kernel. The
> reclaim_until() call failed because of the unexpected over-reclaim of
> memory. This will need a further look but it happens with the 16k page
> size kernel only and I don't have a production ready kernel config file
> to use in buildinig this 16k page size kernel. The new test_memcontrol
> selftest and kernel were also run on a 96-core x86 system to make sure
> there was no regression.
AI reviewbot asks questions:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260319173752.1472864-1-longman%40redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-20 2:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-19 17:37 Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 1/7] memcg: Scale up vmstats flush threshold with log2(nums_possible_cpus) Waiman Long
2026-03-20 10:40 ` Li Wang
2026-03-20 13:19 ` Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 2/7] memcg: Scale down MEMCG_CHARGE_BATCH with increase in PAGE_SIZE Waiman Long
2026-03-20 11:26 ` Li Wang
2026-03-20 13:20 ` Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 3/7] selftests: memcg: Iterate pages based on the actual page size Waiman Long
2026-03-20 11:34 ` Li Wang
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 4/7] selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance in accordance with " Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 5/7] selftests: memcg: Reduce the expected swap.peak with larger " Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 6/7] selftests: memcg: Don't call reclaim_until() if already in target Waiman Long
2026-03-19 17:37 ` [PATCH 7/7] selftests: memcg: Treat failure for zeroing sock in test_memcg_sock as XFAIL Waiman Long
2026-03-20 2:43 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-03-20 15:56 ` [PATCH 0/7] selftests: memcg: Fix test_memcontrol test failures with large page sizes Waiman Long
2026-03-20 20:26 ` Waiman Long
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=20260319194347.1048fc8d737b6e8f9d82663d@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liwan@redhat.com \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=sebastianchlad@gmail.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn \
/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