[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aBURbZD1ZpIUPt64@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 08:39:41 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/2] memcg: Fix test_memcg_min/low test failures
On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 09:04:41PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> v8:
> - Ignore the low event count of child 2 with memory_recursiveprot on
> in patch 1 as originally suggested by Michal.
>
> v7:
> - Skip the vmscan change as the mem_cgroup_usage() check for now as
> it is currently redundant.
>
> v6:
> - The memcg_test_low failure is indeed due to the memory_recursiveprot
> mount option which is enabled by default in systemd cgroup v2 setting.
> So adopt Michal's suggestion to adjust the low event checking
> according to whether memory_recursiveprot is enabled or not.
>
> The test_memcontrol selftest consistently fails its test_memcg_low
> sub-test (with memory_recursiveprot enabled) and sporadically fails
> its test_memcg_min sub-test. This patchset fixes the test_memcg_min
> and test_memcg_low failures by adjusting the test_memcontrol selftest
> to fix these test failures.
>
> Waiman Long (2):
> selftests: memcg: Allow low event with no memory.low and
> memory_recursiveprot on
> selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance of child memory.current
> check in test_memcg_protection()
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Probably best to go through -mm? If cgroup would be better, please let me
know.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists