From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] madvise09: Add MADV_FREE test
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:31:19 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67200919.5693108.1489584679637.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170313110636.10803-1-chrubis@suse.cz>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyril Hrubis" <chrubis@suse.cz>
> To: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Cc: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, 13 March, 2017 12:06:36 PM
> Subject: [PATCH] madvise09: Add MADV_FREE test
Hi,
It worked fine for me with 4.10 and 64k pages on ppc64le.
Couple comments inline:
<snip>
> +
> +static void memory_pressure_child(void)
> +{
> + size_t i, page_size = getpagesize();
> + char *ptr;
> + int sleep = 1;
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + ptr = mmap(NULL, 500 * page_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < 500; i++) {
> + ptr[i * page_size] = i % 100;
> + usleep(sleep);
What I was suggesting was delay between retries. "for" above
won't likely ever finish with 64k pages - it will hit OOM sooner,
so there won't be any delay in subsequent retries.
How about we make "int sleep" global and increase it before
we enter "for" loop?
> + }
> +
> + sleep++;
> + }
> +
> + abort();
> +}
> +
> +static void setup_cgroup_paths(int pid)
> +{
> + snprintf(cgroup_path, sizeof(cgroup_path),
> + MEMCG_PATH "ltp_madvise09_%i/", pid);
> + snprintf(tasks_path, sizeof(tasks_path), "%s/tasks", cgroup_path);
> + snprintf(limit_in_bytes_path, sizeof(limit_in_bytes_path),
> + "%s/memory.limit_in_bytes", cgroup_path);
> + snprintf(memsw_limit_in_bytes_path, sizeof(memsw_limit_in_bytes_path),
> + "%s/memory.memsw.limit_in_bytes", cgroup_path);
> +}
> +
> +static int count_freed(char *ptr)
> +{
> + int i, ret = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < PAGES; i++) {
> + if (!ptr[i * page_size])
> + ret++;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void child(void)
> +{
> + size_t i;
> + char *ptr;
> + unsigned int usage, old_limit, old_memsw_limit;
> + int status, pid, retries = 0;
> +
> + SAFE_MKDIR(cgroup_path, 0777);
> + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(tasks_path, "%i", getpid());
> +
> + ptr = SAFE_MMAP(NULL, PAGES * page_size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < PAGES * page_size; i++)
> + ptr[i] = 'a';
> +
> + if (madvise(ptr, PAGES * page_size, MADV_FREE)) {
> + if (errno == EINVAL)
> + tst_brk(TCONF | TERRNO, "MADV_FREE is not supported");
> +
> + tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "MADV_FREE failed");
> + }
> +
> + if (ptr[page_size] != 'a')
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "MADV_FREE pages were freed immediatelly");
> + else
> + tst_res(TPASS, "MADV_FREE pages were not freed immediatelly");
> +
> + ptr[0] = 'b';
> + ptr[10 * page_size] = 'b';
> +
> + usage = 8 * 1024 * 1024;
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Setting memory limits to %u %u", usage, 2 * usage);
> +
> + SAFE_FILE_SCANF(limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", &old_limit);
> + SAFE_FILE_SCANF(memsw_limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", &old_memsw_limit);
> + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", usage);
> + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(memsw_limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", 2 * usage);
> +
> + do {
> + pid = SAFE_FORK();
> + if (!pid)
> + memory_pressure_child();
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Memory hungry child %i started, try %i", pid, retries);
> +
> + SAFE_WAIT(&status);
> + } while (retries++ < 10 && count_freed(ptr) == 0);
> +
> + if (ptr[0] == 0 || ptr[10 * page_size] == 0)
Would it make sense to make this more strict by checking also expected value?
Just in case we get some non-zero garbage.
if (ptr[0] == 'b' || ptr[10 * page_size] == 'b')
PASS
else
FAIL
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "Page modified after MADV_FREE was freed");
> + else
> + tst_res(TPASS, "Page modified after MADV_FREE was not freed");
> +
> + char map[PAGES+1];
> + unsigned int freed = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < PAGES; i++) {
> + if (ptr[i * page_size]) {
Same here, should we check that entire array contains only [ab0]?
Otherwise FAIL.
> + map[i] = 'p';
> + } else {
> + map[i] = '_';
> + freed++;
> + }
> + }
> + map[PAGES] = '\0';
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Memory map: %s", map);
> +
> + if (freed)
> + tst_res(TPASS, "Pages MADV_FREE were freed on low memory");
> + else
> + tst_res(TFAIL, "No MADV_FREE page was freed on low memory");
> +
> + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(memsw_limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", old_memsw_limit);
> + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(limit_in_bytes_path, "%u", old_limit);
> +
> + SAFE_MUNMAP(ptr, PAGES);
> +
> + exit(0);
> +}
Otherwise it looks good to me.
Regards,
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-15 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-13 11:06 [LTP] [PATCH] madvise09: Add MADV_FREE test Cyril Hrubis
2017-03-15 13:31 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
2017-03-21 13:03 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-03-21 13:23 ` Jan Stancek
2017-03-21 13:36 ` Cyril Hrubis
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-02 16:58 Cyril Hrubis
2017-03-02 14:51 ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-03-06 12:56 ` Jan Stancek
2017-03-08 13:41 ` Cyril Hrubis
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=67200919.5693108.1489584679637.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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.