From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com> To: akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: tj@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, shakeelb@google.com, kernel-team@fb.com, void@manifault.com Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:57:24 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220422155728.3055914-1-void@manifault.com> (raw) tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c contains a set of testcases which validate expected behavior of the cgroup memory controller. Roman Gushchin recently sent out a patchset that fixed a few issues in the test. This patchset continues that effort by fixing a few more issues that were causing non-deterministic failures in the suite. With this patchset, I'm unable to reproduce any more errors after running the tests in a continuous loop for many iterations. Before, I was able to reproduce at least one of the errors fixed in this patchset with just one or two runs. David Vernet (5): cgroups: Refactor children cgroups in memcg tests cgroup: Account for memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low() cgroup: Account for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() cgroup: Removing racy check in test_memcg_sock() cgroup: Fix racy check in alloc_pagecache_max_30M() helper function tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/cgroup_util.c | 12 ++++ tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/cgroup_util.h | 1 + .../selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 69 +++++++++++++------ 3 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) -- 2.30.2
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Vernet <void-gq6j2QGBifHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org> To: akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org Cc: tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, roman.gushchin-fxUVXftIFDnyG1zEObXtfA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org, mhocko-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, shakeelb-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, kernel-team-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org, void-gq6j2QGBifHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org Subject: [PATCH 0/5] Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:57:24 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20220422155728.3055914-1-void@manifault.com> (raw) tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c contains a set of testcases which validate expected behavior of the cgroup memory controller. Roman Gushchin recently sent out a patchset that fixed a few issues in the test. This patchset continues that effort by fixing a few more issues that were causing non-deterministic failures in the suite. With this patchset, I'm unable to reproduce any more errors after running the tests in a continuous loop for many iterations. Before, I was able to reproduce at least one of the errors fixed in this patchset with just one or two runs. David Vernet (5): cgroups: Refactor children cgroups in memcg tests cgroup: Account for memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low() cgroup: Account for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() cgroup: Removing racy check in test_memcg_sock() cgroup: Fix racy check in alloc_pagecache_max_30M() helper function tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/cgroup_util.c | 12 ++++ tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/cgroup_util.h | 1 + .../selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 69 +++++++++++++------ 3 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) -- 2.30.2
next reply other threads:[~2022-04-22 15:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-04-22 15:57 David Vernet [this message] 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 0/5] Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 1/5] cgroups: Refactor children cgroups in memcg tests David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 23:04 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-22 23:04 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 11:30 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 11:30 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 15:19 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 15:19 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 15:33 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 15:33 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 2/5] cgroup: Account for memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low() David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 23:06 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-22 23:06 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 11:33 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 11:33 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 3/5] cgroup: Account for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 23:14 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-22 23:14 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 11:36 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 11:36 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 4/5] cgroup: Removing racy check in test_memcg_sock() David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 23:50 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-22 23:50 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-23 11:50 ` David Vernet 2022-04-23 11:50 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` [PATCH 5/5] cgroup: Fix racy check in alloc_pagecache_max_30M() helper function David Vernet 2022-04-22 15:57 ` David Vernet 2022-04-22 23:56 ` Roman Gushchin 2022-04-22 23:56 ` Roman Gushchin
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20220422155728.3055914-1-void@manifault.com \ --to=void@manifault.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \ --cc=shakeelb@google.com \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.