From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58C7E376; Fri, 2 May 2025 18:39:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746211182; cv=none; b=Fqk4aogoKNcfIlZfNC3WcoaWe7eTdDF9pgcw4tMt5aSiGDZhqAJ2LS8gw/Q20ZyRGhMlUdqfhDvHKhIKN1abvAUDaFmRkauOa5ciSgvo6ULDXFSzZvKnS1NoxnejMyfDDPdcG6HdkhlUE/gtGgfbdVE0nCxV/CN9bLzhkfXakqs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746211182; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eWeXFUsFqqWiEPqkBtlgn2arWqgAePgxBwoLc+q61HE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YO1bn0EMe1fMF1cm7+axVilgrVyB2yPkRUiXkcvXWentfnBBgi6sYcVqN7ktL0F2yVNdYaGiXw8C9HglwlRr2sMF5VLO0VuSERQb9PiOUQoqoromdmjIXliJXLcLaPLPSayGSm64KaA/7fND/NKtCgFtOfqcOOFdCLJsKpIaMfo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=E3Zty5YU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="E3Zty5YU" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F421C4CEE4; Fri, 2 May 2025 18:39:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1746211182; bh=eWeXFUsFqqWiEPqkBtlgn2arWqgAePgxBwoLc+q61HE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=E3Zty5YU1xMsuwMJiRCigUgxNI39PvZ1N4jx+iMe0TG98rOw+D10SZ/8qCZA1nGFb GxikXPlZKLL/qyg8Q5YRuluzxVKFthm+DnWOHyrIk92LuGQ90gjET/Exledj66MVWL 9iXWT5uvP4sV/0u6IpZQ1SeudVmOG5Olti8MfMO7Bj9iV3CLd61yXArnXv8Mc9maaQ 3qo1CiRcgz+ztVAOsa/C12epXmtZTiv2w3DLbBZSaPsAYKF146gCJR/ZLV24ahDjAn 1kjPpgssr4zA7X5otC3WDK+r6xIcjC95bXdU6x9nB/8lpZR3Lrb12WgjNq6joi2iiA j6BwLYBXmCO1w== Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 08:39:41 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Waiman Long Cc: Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin , Shakeel Butt , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= , Shuah Khan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/2] memcg: Fix test_memcg_min/low test failures Message-ID: References: <20250502010443.106022-1-longman@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250502010443.106022-1-longman@redhat.com> On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 09:04:41PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > v8: > - Ignore the low event count of child 2 with memory_recursiveprot on > in patch 1 as originally suggested by Michal. > > v7: > - Skip the vmscan change as the mem_cgroup_usage() check for now as > it is currently redundant. > > v6: > - The memcg_test_low failure is indeed due to the memory_recursiveprot > mount option which is enabled by default in systemd cgroup v2 setting. > So adopt Michal's suggestion to adjust the low event checking > according to whether memory_recursiveprot is enabled or not. > > The test_memcontrol selftest consistently fails its test_memcg_low > sub-test (with memory_recursiveprot enabled) and sporadically fails > its test_memcg_min sub-test. This patchset fixes the test_memcg_min > and test_memcg_low failures by adjusting the test_memcontrol selftest > to fix these test failures. > > Waiman Long (2): > selftests: memcg: Allow low event with no memory.low and > memory_recursiveprot on > selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance of child memory.current > check in test_memcg_protection() Acked-by: Tejun Heo Probably best to go through -mm? If cgroup would be better, please let me know. Thanks. -- tejun