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 picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA0D5CD5BB1 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 11:36:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46AED3E5294 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 13:36:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220A03C5AE0 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 13:36:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4D982002DF for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 13:36:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA56E6770D; Mon, 25 May 2026 11:36:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1779708990; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Vvh9Yr65w02my8jd2OdlCLeGbVIJRTSPWPMssF3GRlY=; b=fTo3U2ngcva7Ag/99JW6ECLAqDLg79697+AkUEpJPO6LTzVPhouMG3C2jn7T8y6BEsthmr 2FO4fg7girlKU8ZDZZudq3ej25wdPg/zCDCUhBgnUbVIrpyreMJAiFT0ojG+kR2GLMxUnp wQ1oXWAWQ7kDDn9NkORaAuQauobfdH0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1779708990; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Vvh9Yr65w02my8jd2OdlCLeGbVIJRTSPWPMssF3GRlY=; b=cCgTRUU+he0SWeIV8Xs+XqUk8Hyd/0cdnrDvGHRDOzEuEtuM0CCBDyWZ9xKXlYeqEkVVJI FBgvZiecRdt1AEDA== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=BHx1EiIs; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=TsCBtddA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1779708989; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Vvh9Yr65w02my8jd2OdlCLeGbVIJRTSPWPMssF3GRlY=; b=BHx1EiIsTD5cPgHZ0QwtC8mBNl6KPdkwoA2dvkD4Gq/zCLurMpt/4cYWXkRdlRThPpq+0S Rb9kcwwR0PqzuMCiOOn/W2yds4xT7fYOJlQUtu+/XTLcKkRqoawwVIFm/nXC4V9UahkfLe Z/JnjQRi+3xdJveuBLQOIpX4PuIu3lw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1779708989; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Vvh9Yr65w02my8jd2OdlCLeGbVIJRTSPWPMssF3GRlY=; b=TsCBtddA+p2lThuI2KiytrYLo3rlFvc2Kl+TEmoeple3U0V0yl7rMPqi3nNIaxBqDkAyIe g0Ti7aZCzOw246Cg== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B706A59C0B; Mon, 25 May 2026 11:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id CtV1Kz00FGpNCAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 25 May 2026 11:36:29 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 13:36:28 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: <20260525113628.GB181471@pevik> References: <20260525073921.172426-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20260525094224.GA181471@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: EA56E6770D X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.71 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:dkim,suse.cz:replyto,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+] X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.9 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/1] min_free_kbytes: TCONF on errno ENOMEM, add break X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hi! > > > This looks suspicious. If we fail with the fork here that probably means > > > that the memory allocated by the previous iteration wasn't reclaimed > > > fast enough. Was this on a second or third iteration (we do three > > > iterations with different overcommit values)? > > This is on one of my bare metal machines, first iteration: > > min_free_kbytes.c:91: TINFO: Setting /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory to 2 > > min_free_kbytes.c:95: TINFO: Setting /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes to 67584 > > min_free_kbytes.c:111: TBROK: fork: ENOMEM (12) > > tst_test.c:1933: TINFO: Killed the leftover descendant processes > With overcommit = 2 (never) this just means that memory on your machine > has been all consumed[1]. It may make sense to TCONF on overcommit=2 but > I'm not so sure the other two overcommit modes. > [1] The available memory is counted as swap + 50% of RAM Thanks for info. I set this patch as changes requested. I might send a patch adding it only for overcommit = 2, but I consider sporadic TFAIL: MemFree < min_free_kbytes we get as more important to fix. Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp