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 6DCD9CCFA0D for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 16:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 441143CE55B for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 17:45:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::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 75B953CE4B6 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 17:45:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) (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 A9ED3200AED for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 17:45:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [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-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1312421151; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 16:45:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1762361112; h=from:from: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=O+wZFO4KM0A2jV64mg2qxKz78s+XJsCB+PowOR6kEHA=; b=0S+9IKIoli4kcY2zXzO4XDHl8pGJCApDRng20wmQ0MNynb8cp4h1ExExXz3KzW67T4wnXA Ej2XZO+5L/CHCI8nP7ees2s7vX0K7TCj4ptZAZlAP30LzrlajdOZhtB0dBmOfzi3v9bgnw zKEWV1ftBAfhk61EQRxDmzxzaQVU6q0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1762361112; h=from:from: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=O+wZFO4KM0A2jV64mg2qxKz78s+XJsCB+PowOR6kEHA=; b=gu08htKnx/dUbtfR1zMeK3+kWVdKuYmn+MNJJ4WbBBLhQa57SFCHXRuJuOlrLYbx9F1GMg bhcuRy6pjgHVq7BA== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1762361111; h=from:from: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=O+wZFO4KM0A2jV64mg2qxKz78s+XJsCB+PowOR6kEHA=; b=1tQwQMUMbUU83eV9KF0b9WG7yqqFx1M8o16fBH2eJblLEME/LQqCIrBpysuxluR2ZNit1Z k0IZSrynDdWwCmeWRivVxcCCnwES4YopLbytmEN0Yq0ReuAodugtm5q6FJRPcK4D4M8FDt IcVFUyVhKS9tYcfCgEanX5MUVjqZGUI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1762361111; h=from:from: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=O+wZFO4KM0A2jV64mg2qxKz78s+XJsCB+PowOR6kEHA=; b=sOAevyL/7w1MuWCqLGcIRIM277TTdaOhVZmqIEL8mRF4GACwdpbgNoKuUJ3p7NgM/Cva/Y rhGBzHrHqqo6USCA== 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 B575113699; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 16:45:10 +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 6UpzJhZ/C2nAVwAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 05 Nov 2025 16:45:10 +0000 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 17:45:56 +0100 From: Cyril Hrubis To: Andrea Cervesato Message-ID: References: <20251105-b4-memcg_stress_rewrite-v1-1-5e354dd5439f@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251105-b4-memcg_stress_rewrite-v1-1-5e354dd5439f@suse.com> X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-8.30 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[99.99%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[yuki.lan:mid, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo, suse.cz:email] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.9 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] memory: rewrite memcg_stress_test into C API 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: , 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! > + SAFE_FILE_PRINTF("/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches", "3"); > + > + mem_free = SAFE_READ_MEMINFO("MemFree:"); > + mem_avail = SAFE_READ_MEMINFO("MemAvailable:"); > + swap_free = SAFE_READ_MEMINFO("SwapFree:"); > + > + SAFE_FILE_SCANF("/proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes", "%zi", &mem_min); > + > + mem_min = mem_min + mem_min / 10; > + reserved_mem = swap_free > mem_min ? 0 : mem_min; > + > + mem_per_proc = mem_free < mem_avail ? mem_free : mem_avail; We just dropped caches, so mem_free should be close to mem_avail. I guess that we can use only one of these two. It looks more or less fine as the replacement, however I find some things in the test a bit worrisome. For instance the sleep() between forks of the children will be on some systems enough for the previous child to finish while on bigger systems (with large RAM) would be too short. So first of all we should decide if we want to run the children in serial or in parallel mode and change the code accordingly. As for me serial mode makes more sense to me, since with parallel mode we are going to hit OOM under certain conditions. -- Cyril Hrubis chrubis@suse.cz -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp