From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>
Cc: david@redhat.com, Stefan Roesch <shr@devkernel.io>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, oliver.sang@intel.com, kernel-team@fb.com,
ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v1] mem: disable KSM smart scan for ksm tests
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 17:51:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231128165132.GA406520@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEemH2dQDVg+nLD4cTjgReoUaZ+FU7TFEsg=Vc8h6sdV-VqLpg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Stefan, Li,
> Hi Stefan, Petr,
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:46 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> > > This disables the "smart scan" KSM feature to make sure that the volatile
> > > count remains at 0.
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <devkernel.io>
> > nit: you forgot 'shr@'
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <shr@devkernel.io>
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> > > Closes:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202311161132.13d8ce5a-oliver.sang@intel.com
> > > ---
> > > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 4 ++++
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > index fbfeef026..ef274a3ac 100644
> > > --- a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > @@ -454,6 +454,9 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit)
> > > {'a', size*MB}, {'a', size*MB}, {'d', size*MB}, {'d',
> > size*MB},
> > > };
> > > + /* Disable smart scan for correct volatile counts. */
> > > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "smart_scan", "0");
> > NOTE, this fails on the systems without /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan:
> > mem.c:458: TBROK: Failed to open FILE '/sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan' for
> > writing: EACCES (13)
> > NOTE, we normally handle the setup like this in test setup function.
> > But new API has .save_restore which is more robust for tasks like this.
> > It's already used in ksm01.c, you need just to add this line:
> > {"/sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan", "0", TST_SR_SKIP},
> I guess we need to set 'TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING | TST_SR_TBROK_RO'
> as the last field. Because TST_SR_SKIP will continue the test without
> writing '0' to the smart_scan file, that's not correct if the file exists.
> It will
> ignore a kernel bug (smart_scan can't be written) by that config.
> Per the Doc Petr pointed below:
> TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING – Continue without saving the file if it does not
> exist
> TST_SR_TBROK_RO – End test with TBROK if the file is read-only
> TST_SR_SKIP_RO – Continue without saving the file if it is read-only
> TST_SR_SKIP – Equivalent to 'TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING | TST_SR_SKIP_RO'
> > (instead of both SAFE_FILE_PRINTF)
> > See:
> > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/C-Test-API#127-saving--restoring-procsys-values
> > I wonder if ksm01.c is the only ksm test which needs to disable this.
> I think all of the ksm0*.c tests should disable it by the config. The
> smart_scan
> will impact all the tests with invoke key function create_same_memory().
ksm05.c and ksm06.c does not use create_same_memory(). Or did I overlook
something?
> > also nit: there is a wrong indent (spaces instead of tabs), please be
> > consistent
> > with the file content.
> > NOTE: while this fixes problem on 6.7.0-rc1-2.g86e46c2-default (openSUSE),
> > it does not fixes other problem on 6.5.10 on Debian (16 errors like these
> > below):
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_shared is not 2 but 5038.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_sharing is not 98302 but 593629.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_volatile is not 0 but 391.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_unshared is not 0 but 149157.
> > I have no idea if this is a real bug which needs to be fixed or test false
> > positive to be fixed, or whether the problem has already been fixed in
> > newer
> > kernels.
> It is more like a real bug, the Debain kernel-6.5.10 does not contain
> this smart_scan feature. Or you may try to build the latest kernel
> on your platform to see if it can be reproduced as well.
I'll try to reproduce this on mainline kernel 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7.
> > > +
> > > ps = sysconf(_SC_PAGE_SIZE);
> > > pages = MB / ps;
> > > @@ -526,6 +529,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit)
> > > tst_res(TINFO, "stop KSM.");
> > > SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "run", "0");
> > > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "smart_scan", "1");
> > nit: Again, wrong indent. You could have seen it also in the generated
> > patch.
> > Kind regards,
> > Petr
> > > final_group_check(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * pages * num);
> > > while (waitpid(-1, &status, 0) > 0)
> > > base-commit: 8c89ef3d451087ed6e18750bd5eedd10e5ab3d2e
> One more comment not related to this patch:
> @Stefan, do you have a test (or plan to) verify the 'smart_scan' feture
> works?
> As we do disables it for all ksm* tests in LTP, so, it would be great to
> have one
> for testing in enable mode. What do you think?
This makes perfect sense even if I'm not that ksm05.c and ksm06.c also needs to
disable smart_scan.
Kind regards,
Petr
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Roesch <shr@devkernel.io>,
kernel-team@fb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, david@redhat.com,
oliver.sang@intel.com, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v1] mem: disable KSM smart scan for ksm tests
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 17:51:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231128165132.GA406520@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEemH2dQDVg+nLD4cTjgReoUaZ+FU7TFEsg=Vc8h6sdV-VqLpg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Stefan, Li,
> Hi Stefan, Petr,
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:46 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> > > This disables the "smart scan" KSM feature to make sure that the volatile
> > > count remains at 0.
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <devkernel.io>
> > nit: you forgot 'shr@'
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roesch <shr@devkernel.io>
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> > > Closes:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202311161132.13d8ce5a-oliver.sang@intel.com
> > > ---
> > > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 4 ++++
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > index fbfeef026..ef274a3ac 100644
> > > --- a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c
> > > @@ -454,6 +454,9 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit)
> > > {'a', size*MB}, {'a', size*MB}, {'d', size*MB}, {'d',
> > size*MB},
> > > };
> > > + /* Disable smart scan for correct volatile counts. */
> > > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "smart_scan", "0");
> > NOTE, this fails on the systems without /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan:
> > mem.c:458: TBROK: Failed to open FILE '/sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan' for
> > writing: EACCES (13)
> > NOTE, we normally handle the setup like this in test setup function.
> > But new API has .save_restore which is more robust for tasks like this.
> > It's already used in ksm01.c, you need just to add this line:
> > {"/sys/kernel/mm/ksm/smart_scan", "0", TST_SR_SKIP},
> I guess we need to set 'TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING | TST_SR_TBROK_RO'
> as the last field. Because TST_SR_SKIP will continue the test without
> writing '0' to the smart_scan file, that's not correct if the file exists.
> It will
> ignore a kernel bug (smart_scan can't be written) by that config.
> Per the Doc Petr pointed below:
> TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING – Continue without saving the file if it does not
> exist
> TST_SR_TBROK_RO – End test with TBROK if the file is read-only
> TST_SR_SKIP_RO – Continue without saving the file if it is read-only
> TST_SR_SKIP – Equivalent to 'TST_SR_SKIP_MISSING | TST_SR_SKIP_RO'
> > (instead of both SAFE_FILE_PRINTF)
> > See:
> > https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/C-Test-API#127-saving--restoring-procsys-values
> > I wonder if ksm01.c is the only ksm test which needs to disable this.
> I think all of the ksm0*.c tests should disable it by the config. The
> smart_scan
> will impact all the tests with invoke key function create_same_memory().
ksm05.c and ksm06.c does not use create_same_memory(). Or did I overlook
something?
> > also nit: there is a wrong indent (spaces instead of tabs), please be
> > consistent
> > with the file content.
> > NOTE: while this fixes problem on 6.7.0-rc1-2.g86e46c2-default (openSUSE),
> > it does not fixes other problem on 6.5.10 on Debian (16 errors like these
> > below):
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_shared is not 2 but 5038.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_sharing is not 98302 but 593629.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_volatile is not 0 but 391.
> > mem.c:252: TFAIL: pages_unshared is not 0 but 149157.
> > I have no idea if this is a real bug which needs to be fixed or test false
> > positive to be fixed, or whether the problem has already been fixed in
> > newer
> > kernels.
> It is more like a real bug, the Debain kernel-6.5.10 does not contain
> this smart_scan feature. Or you may try to build the latest kernel
> on your platform to see if it can be reproduced as well.
I'll try to reproduce this on mainline kernel 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7.
> > > +
> > > ps = sysconf(_SC_PAGE_SIZE);
> > > pages = MB / ps;
> > > @@ -526,6 +529,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit)
> > > tst_res(TINFO, "stop KSM.");
> > > SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "run", "0");
> > > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(PATH_KSM "smart_scan", "1");
> > nit: Again, wrong indent. You could have seen it also in the generated
> > patch.
> > Kind regards,
> > Petr
> > > final_group_check(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * pages * num);
> > > while (waitpid(-1, &status, 0) > 0)
> > > base-commit: 8c89ef3d451087ed6e18750bd5eedd10e5ab3d2e
> One more comment not related to this patch:
> @Stefan, do you have a test (or plan to) verify the 'smart_scan' feture
> works?
> As we do disables it for all ksm* tests in LTP, so, it would be great to
> have one
> for testing in enable mode. What do you think?
This makes perfect sense even if I'm not that ksm05.c and ksm06.c also needs to
disable smart_scan.
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-28 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-27 17:45 [LTP] [PATCH v1] mem: disable KSM smart scan for ksm tests Stefan Roesch
2023-11-27 17:45 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-11-28 7:46 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-11-28 7:46 ` Petr Vorel
2023-11-28 10:35 ` Li Wang
2023-11-28 10:35 ` Li Wang
2023-11-28 16:51 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2023-11-28 16:51 ` Petr Vorel
2023-11-29 3:51 ` Li Wang
2023-11-29 3:51 ` Li Wang
2023-11-29 10:10 ` Petr Vorel
2023-11-29 10:10 ` Petr Vorel
2023-12-01 20:11 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-12-01 20:11 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-12-01 20:06 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-12-01 20:06 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-12-01 20:02 ` Stefan Roesch
2023-12-01 20:02 ` Stefan Roesch
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=20231128165132.GA406520@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liwang@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=shr@devkernel.io \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.