Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests

David Vernet
2022-05-12T17:44:52Z

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:30:18AM -0700, David Vernet wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:04:10PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> > Are the Roman's patches merged anywhere? (I ran into some issues when I
> > was rebasing your (David's) series on top of master.) I'd like to put
> > all sensible patches in one series or stack on existing branch (if
> > there's any).
>
> Roman's patches are present on master on the linux-mm tree. See
> b7dbfd6553d..a131b1ed12c6.
>
> > For possible v3 of this series, I did:
> > - dropped the patch that allows non-zero memory.events:low for a sibling with
> > memory.low=0 when mounted with memory_recursiveprot (the case needs more
> > discussion),
>
> Ack, and thanks for keeping us steered in the right direction here. I don't
> see this in the patch set you linked, but I agree this commit should be
> reverted and the reclaim logic instead fixed.
>
> > - added few more cleanups, convenience for debugging,
>
> Are you referring to the FAIL() macro you added? I would love to Ack that,
> but unfortunately checkpatch.pl will probably yell at you for having a goto
> in that macro, per the point about avoiding macros that affect control flow
> [0].
>
> I tried to do the same thing when sending out my patch set and had to
> revert it before sending it to upstream.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> [0] https://github.com/Werkov/linux/commit/a076339cc4825af2f22f58c1347a572b104b8221

Sorry, I meant to link this: