From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2798C433F5 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 00:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 008AD6B0073; Tue, 17 May 2022 20:52:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id ED4216B0074; Tue, 17 May 2022 20:52:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D74296B0075; Tue, 17 May 2022 20:52:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60616B0073 for ; Tue, 17 May 2022 20:52:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin02.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BC5520547 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 00:52:34 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79477038228.02.6DD5CC8 Received: from out0.migadu.com (out0.migadu.com [94.23.1.103]) by imf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FA91000CD for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 00:52:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 17:52:25 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1652835152; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1o3oJN5gQQTieH2g5nQdeNUsC++N3DE8B+0iuF60aw4=; b=GewWqVjHhWuzqety2mXdbrWLrO/2oTjNznANQxyCkgxP+e0u82igfbs4pzNk60tmlj1tYB BlmTPiX2hXmz4bXqK+HQh8R74tV+IczWEnsR7jCoVrqBTpmbRGGdqnG2cWlqtXsyrIz6Sh JMQY/aTeFX58HSFvXL1xAE3A9SQntrI= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Roman Gushchin To: Andrew Morton Cc: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= , void@manifault.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kernel-team@fb.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mhocko@kernel.org, shakeelb@google.com, tj@kernel.org, Richard Palethorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] selftests: memcg: Remove protection from top level memcg Message-ID: References: <20220512174452.tr34tuh4k5jm6qjs@dev0025.ash9.facebook.com> <20220513171811.730-1-mkoutny@suse.com> <20220513171811.730-5-mkoutny@suse.com> <20220517172443.3e524a8319c693ab24c5f22e@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20220517172443.3e524a8319c693ab24c5f22e@linux-foundation.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Migadu-Auth-User: linux.dev X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47FA91000CD X-Stat-Signature: 6mc8kuu7h58qbssq13kbaa7wh5dghwwt X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf14.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=GewWqVjH; spf=pass (imf14.hostedemail.com: domain of roman.gushchin@linux.dev designates 94.23.1.103 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=roman.gushchin@linux.dev; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev X-HE-Tag: 1652835151-831432 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 05:24:43PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 13 May 2022 11:59:56 -0700 Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 07:18:11PM +0200, Michal Koutny wrote: > > > The reclaim is triggered by memory limit in a subtree, therefore the > > > testcase does not need configured protection against external reclaim. > > > > > > Also, correct/deduplicate respective comments > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný > > > --- > > > tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 12 ++++-------- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c > > > index 9ffacf024bbd..9d370aafd799 100644 > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c > > > @@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ static int cg_test_proc_killed(const char *cgroup) > > > > > > /* > > > * First, this test creates the following hierarchy: > > > - * A memory.min = 50M, memory.max = 200M > > > + * A memory.min = 0, memory.max = 200M > > > * A/B memory.min = 50M, memory.current = 50M > > > * A/B/C memory.min = 75M, memory.current = 50M > > > * A/B/D memory.min = 25M, memory.current = 50M > > > @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static int cg_test_proc_killed(const char *cgroup) > > > * Usages are pagecache, but the test keeps a running > > > * process in every leaf cgroup. > > > * Then it creates A/G and creates a significant > > > - * memory pressure in it. > > > + * memory pressure in A. > > > * > > > * A/B memory.current ~= 50M > > > * A/B/C memory.current ~= 29M > > > @@ -335,8 +335,6 @@ static int test_memcg_min(const char *root) > > > (void *)(long)fd); > > > } > > > > > > - if (cg_write(parent[0], "memory.min", "50M")) > > > - goto cleanup; > > > if (cg_write(parent[1], "memory.min", "50M")) > > > goto cleanup; > > > if (cg_write(children[0], "memory.min", "75M")) > > > @@ -404,8 +402,8 @@ static int test_memcg_min(const char *root) > > > > > > /* > > > * First, this test creates the following hierarchy: > > > - * A memory.low = 50M, memory.max = 200M > > > - * A/B memory.low = 50M, memory.current = 50M > > > + * A memory.low = 0, memory.max = 200M > > > + * A/B memory.low = 50M, memory.current = ... > > > > Can you, please, just remove "memory.current = ...", it's not > > because obvious what "..." means here. > > > > You mean this? > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c~selftests-memcg-remove-protection-from-top-level-memcg-fix > +++ a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c > @@ -403,15 +403,14 @@ cleanup: > /* > * First, this test creates the following hierarchy: > * A memory.low = 0, memory.max = 200M > - * A/B memory.low = 50M, memory.current = ... > + * A/B memory.low = 50M > * A/B/C memory.low = 75M, memory.current = 50M > * A/B/D memory.low = 25M, memory.current = 50M > * A/B/E memory.low = 0, memory.current = 50M > * A/B/F memory.low = 500M, memory.current = 0 > * > * Usages are pagecache. > - * Then it creates A/G an creates a significant > - * memory pressure in it. > + * Then it creates A/G and creates significant memory pressure in it. > * > * Then it checks actual memory usages and expects that: > * A/B memory.current ~= 50M > _ > > (includes gratuitous comment cleanup) Yes, thank you! > > I assume your comment in > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/Yn6pBPq+lAXm9NG8@carbon can be addressed in a > later patch. > > I'm not sure what to amke of https://lkml.kernel.org/r/Yn6pWPodGPlz+D8G@carbon > > Do we feel this series needs more work before merging it up? > Please, go ahead with it. If anything comes up, it can be addressed later. Thanks!