From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: "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>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>, "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance of child memory.current check in test_memcg_protection()
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 21:24:35 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250404012435.656045-2-longman@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250404012435.656045-1-longman@redhat.com>
The test_memcg_protection() function is used for the test_memcg_min and
test_memcg_low sub-tests. This function generates a set of parent/child
cgroups like:
parent: memory.min/low = 50M
child 0: memory.min/low = 75M, memory.current = 50M
child 1: memory.min/low = 25M, memory.current = 50M
child 2: memory.min/low = 0, memory.current = 50M
After applying memory pressure, the function expects the following
actual memory usages.
parent: memory.current ~= 50M
child 0: memory.current ~= 29M
child 1: memory.current ~= 21M
child 2: memory.current ~= 0
In reality, the actual memory usages can differ quite a bit from the
expected values. It uses an error tolerance of 10% with the values_close()
helper.
Both the test_memcg_min and test_memcg_low sub-tests can fail
sporadically because the actual memory usage exceeds the 10% error
tolerance. Below are a sample of the usage data of the tests runs
that fail.
Child Actual usage Expected usage %err
----- ------------ -------------- ----
1 16990208 22020096 -12.9%
1 17252352 22020096 -12.1%
0 37699584 30408704 +10.7%
1 14368768 22020096 -21.0%
1 16871424 22020096 -13.2%
The current 10% error tolerenace might be right at the time
test_memcontrol.c was first introduced in v4.18 kernel, but memory
reclaim have certainly evolved quite a bit since then which may result
in a bit more run-to-run variation than previously expected.
Increase the error tolerance to 15% for child 0 and 20% for child 1 to
minimize the chance of this type of failure. The tolerance is bigger
for child 1 because an upswing in child 0 corresponds to a smaller
%err than a similar downswing in child 1 due to the way %err is used
in values_close().
Before this patch, a 100 test runs of test_memcontrol produced the
following results:
19 not ok 3 test_memcg_min
13 not ok 4 test_memcg_low
After applying this patch, there were no test failure for test_memcg_min
and test_memcg_low in 100 test runs.
Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
index 16f5d74ae762..f442c0c3f5a7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
@@ -495,10 +495,10 @@ static int test_memcg_protection(const char *root, bool min)
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(children); i++)
c[i] = cg_read_long(children[i], "memory.current");
- if (!values_close(c[0], MB(29), 10))
+ if (!values_close(c[0], MB(29), 15))
goto cleanup;
- if (!values_close(c[1], MB(21), 10))
+ if (!values_close(c[1], MB(21), 20))
goto cleanup;
if (c[3] != 0)
--
2.48.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-04 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-04 1:24 [PATCH v2 1/2] memcg: Don't generate low/min events if either low/min or elow/emin is 0 Waiman Long
2025-04-04 1:24 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2025-04-04 17:12 ` Tejun Heo
2025-04-04 17:25 ` Waiman Long
2025-04-04 18:13 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-04-04 18:55 ` Waiman Long
2025-04-04 19:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2025-04-05 18:52 ` Waiman Long
2025-04-04 18:26 ` Michal Koutný
2025-04-04 19:01 ` 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=20250404012435.656045-2-longman@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).