From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f45.google.com (mail-pj1-f45.google.com [209.85.216.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6FD21684BE for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 00:17:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.45 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783383476; cv=none; b=RNkNAOT4LiuZ6pgj7PMoRdkq6dqOsFEQgQYCu5rdyGi2TOhjB5/YzkLMi9T79iRAhxv0N/Lnd9TAxxQdZi3ifVlksCICu9gIOa9eMHaFs8wA8X5p+mF52BkAnLpeoqjtzEoQpC+eRkFhvypKN+h87pyisIHvaY8E1QVe9lObjyI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783383476; c=relaxed/simple; bh=af72MIiNPASyMrPenWUlckSQNn+OURdtih1H9LpKlI4=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=LuqzwfvADIkm0I6+QlD4vj6g+jHBkzAs0cRtZTfi6Fm/EysjYD9GnKwBH+SmOsF4HFmJMtIJ5ykySKniB3TiO8xthhkkGtOnAOX8WJoVb9BjgMKe4BmEKh2+rqrvnfRwSwBgqv4SqovjbPYjwvsV49QVRg3QZBmLnK3ZH4Qr4m8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=P2UChFPG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.45 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="P2UChFPG" Received: by mail-pj1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-37df72c9984so3500103a91.3 for ; Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:17:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1783383474; x=1783988274; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NlYk0sNL0UkMJvtmh539AMWShHtruvV8sV0IdItG1l0=; b=P2UChFPGk+gSselBw1l9QAitcDVL1UVr1rYuMfJAJp/H02DWIazkdCjUUQTqDHR+wE gsPUm8oUz0Zdppyc1D7a6HBcy/zWtuvdA4up6FOx7SN3MJD5HSFAoBCvO9DumA5mg0Lw a42EdP/KKa3XN/SOvd+wF5IuQrDFnPPrZJOouz0o952YAmIypE1+6eyCRtyWTv7I0n+R u8tKEWp751lwecHjOhLXsn2Q/pxCtAVVWWyCaIYGu8wO3+zG4YOwwSiEhFgeKp4XFoo+ A8LwOVhCR0g0Os0yfMwZVSfh4fhRqxbQa51HnhL2FnR8wYxvWBW/MSwOnOfutcQjzdK+ f0zQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1783383474; x=1783988274; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NlYk0sNL0UkMJvtmh539AMWShHtruvV8sV0IdItG1l0=; b=RTxMAOAeffOHbfYRT9zozbybzYamrxNkz2P/WPnJvP1xclQEjXaJR4S57soYA3HCpw qsdmmN36C1niEHd7545542h4J4nbxj/C8dQrq0FhgHdfUGCwtPcgh+kAbGncrGCpcsa/ Uby5AIJItoImhvMAG2RkWuQ0FA1eJ5Rdb9gD8ClJjCAYOWayXco87HvhSLJxxe1+Nfi7 UThS9InFu5ha2QZPxAdl054xLB1Wl6U1ixsjTKWOAaXKPIGQ7XlNKsJfdMiYH8VW8BxW pqMYIW2DhHqzOP63FXiqyrtU3z7q+gHvoL4oL464C0lQi1rFoehBhCYFqk+YgNWQMwL2 U0+w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RpTWiJ+i1u51hFl0oUQC8wRvYN5w6fZeDkLU+RIJBgPFYVmS+ilSRc1NkbThyctJQkSKNxqFtJtJVDo7e0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywa+d5LdPZGSoFL+Ndh5B91RZQ0MDp7b7VZQagC1pYaJxjJcdWu 0QpSfh2f8zLXUwDE/yC3vouX/9+dwzwePlxi+YC54s2ICUpFA/y3Fs90 X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7ckA/0CdvqTKZB9sPgNI3YEpw2h7r624WNwaqWql1dZWPim61ZHAPsQ0Us6jMFa OuEnvtoj03AGm8g4AOsG592OyJlpW17VzS8IGW4aqvcs5cVd8iIg3TDxhmTMB9TTvL/FaFpvaYH 8t/siKL0dKYbjb3M6B2yQs7WUot7akOCXkW9SkmQx60wsDONfEXyX3xahRboboI61tStXR6omtJ 3mfTgdzwLiZCi4LBW5qV2E6ftO4UbBMD7PKxA+kQqi2tNUBN1CO01CxuSyd4H2zTHtmxTY36fHj ZUajCC7D7799qxY3t8Em9KllzW2X0DJuqgWHwl3+EP1KBzyTW+BLzaLTma1FgAc0nocuzAIjFn1 G8prgFlYzyzXWGAusWliiisdX5+cotPgMkINao9ZWi5PeQafRbMgZyVx4WLywhYbfQhKXjeMw+4 IT6Yb5LK4v7kt5ghzGk68Rz8xXxtA6hRZBjOfpaXi+ar8cmkVVq5g1TRQR6zjhS9wcaM81hw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1845:b0:37f:9cdf:f0ad with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-38757d76999mr2730666a91.28.1783383474243; Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2a03:83e0:115c:1:275a:65bb:602c:da1d? ([2620:10d:c090:500::1:7696]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-31174a89a89sm1783645eec.20.2026.07.06.17.17.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] selftests/bpf: compare BPF and memory.stat memcg stat readers From: Eduard Zingerman To: Ziyang Men , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi , bpf@vger.kernel.org, shakeel.butt@linux.dev Cc: Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , Jiri Olsa , Emil Tsalapatis , Shuah Khan , Roman Gushchin , kernel-team@meta.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shakeel Butt Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:17:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20260704045617.487664-1-ziyang.meme@gmail.com> References: <20260704045617.487664-1-ziyang.meme@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.60.1 (3.60.1-1.fc44) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Fri, 2026-07-03 at 21:56 -0700, Ziyang Men wrote: [...] Hi Ziyang, I'm a bit hesitant adding 2.5K lines of code to the BPF selftests, as this code would need to be (a) maintained, (b) run at each CI invocation= . Hence, the tests added need to be relevant for the BPF sub-system. Regarding the benchmarking part, as you state yourself: > In my testing (a 60-CPU VM) the BPF path is roughly an order of magnitu= de > faster than the per-cgroup memory.stat parse for a whole-tree scan, mai= nly > because it avoids the per-cgroup open/read and string parsing. With this, I think the benchmarking code can be dropped altogether. Next, the three memcg_stat_{reader,churn,churn_percpu}.c files share a lot of utility code almost verbatim (e.g. tree definition/construction). Such duplication should be avoided. Finally, from the BPF point of view the test exercises the following functi= onality: - kfuncs: - bpf_mem_cgroup_page_state - bpf_mem_cgroup_vm_events - bpf_put_mem_cgroup - bpf_get_mem_cgroup - main iterator logic. All kfuncs but bpf_get_mem_cgroup() are thin wrappers around mm/memcontrol.= c code, all kfuncs including the bpf_get_mem_cgroup() are already exercised in the = selftests. The iterator logic itself is covered by 8 sub-tests in the prog_tests/cgrou= p_iter.c. Hence two questions: - What do these new tests add in terms of tests coverage? - Why do BPF selftests need to exercise the churn and churn_percpu scenario= s? Shakeel, could you please comment as well? Thanks, Eduard. [...]