[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <238226BB-6536-489A-BCC7-4611F86D036D@linux.dev>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 08:59:48 -0700
From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
To: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events test
> On Apr 15, 2022, at 7:08 AM, David Vernet <void@...ifault.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 05:01:30PM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>> Commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events") made
>> memory.events recursive: all events are propagated upwards by the
>> tree. It was a change in semantics.
>
> In one of our offline discussions you mentioned that we may want to
> consider having the test take mount options into account. If we decide to
> go that route we should probably have this testcase take memory_localevents
> into account as well. If so, I'm happy to take care of that in a follow-on
> patch after this is merged as I already have a patch locally that reads and
> parses /proc/mounts to detect these mount options.
It would be great, thank you!
>> - if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") != 0)
>> + if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") <= 0)
>> goto cleanup;
>>
>> ret = KSFT_PASS;
>> --
>> 2.35.1
>>
>
> Looks good, thanks.
>
> Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists