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 2A75AC43334 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2022 10:09:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB28D3CA501 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2022 12:09:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C4D53CA3FB for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2022 12:09:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 846A76005CD for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2022 12:09:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com with SMTP id 189so804453vsh.2 for ; Sat, 09 Jul 2022 03:09:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=v6QN0BMxy87fBbX8zBHEBlnKlgspasFaCvwY63x619A=; b=QBwVTWTA1p0xFNzvgi/o8Mtt7A6oGnz/POqTdSUapL2nPnvfAjy2/CM2LvrBsCBLr7 RfVYZpTMqx+8oXCrY94ID18Q+gWOx3L8gGktlWI8lNmQu10t3RizpZ4dJJXxGZ6XZ1HI UeQa/LVDdYLwMpHWiTQdP8E1j4tgWJ6WIobdByCxtTs8X20LzNXBLUlgN5CWDH3e8C22 xIKkovg3fUyfblSO05ZBIaMfdomAZuhAkhEzNPVfy6eMc1WdS2gheJ/w/TVxVmzL3CQd AzseRc3DNUMrLavoFCTL8/ZTTAeXDQc0QplHDknei78qQJdnbXmhgjCJ1q4Q2ONUOZ3a wN/Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=v6QN0BMxy87fBbX8zBHEBlnKlgspasFaCvwY63x619A=; b=wF1/XUJ71Rqfry7UbMij5oP2ff8t0JFtNPMc2h8XT2newafWkIp2gKNsjPvn33ETND 5SZIJXbof9cKFh3PkuDmpInM0iSZVqskfy5GGT2oIZOZrWyPZdRh+S2VPfMGXWTpL/vk xEC1qNJ/AB0G8YHev/pZYUTyCbfAbaFggnrmGCQnDvysIKKIfijFi8HAo2cL1JWZ2aTq mcG2pJP9hXQedLrbQfGhVdkMU0I1mVbpHVGxBH1izRaB8KJMB7lycmOc3JEeKrajm8Wg l7VLx6UqMgDGpAs2x9HXPN5KXMPPuTGozgAoUU8TEPXk9bj7V9SudOldZHJL9lPzmwUC 4kng== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+Bq5IBvwiIFijSUdl9YUGKvta9GLvXvyObGH5cLJLE88eOTfLQ c3yvi/OFFQOT/fDu0YYNOaZs9OBWYZT92NXVoGE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tMNfKHqrya04nVavgNVdQTdCMKapdeQkGUKXI8fAZuKh2J8iRm97MzMx513U/fwYiW6imd0pzOzihBHiPocSs= X-Received: by 2002:a67:c113:0:b0:354:3ef9:3f79 with SMTP id d19-20020a67c113000000b003543ef93f79mr3329035vsj.3.1657361380260; Sat, 09 Jul 2022 03:09:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220613143826.1328830-1-amir73il@gmail.com> <20220613143826.1328830-6-amir73il@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Amir Goldstein Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2022 13:09:28 +0300 Message-ID: To: Jan Stancek X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 5/5] syscalls/fanotify10: Add test cases for evictable ignore mark 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: Jan Kara , LTP List , Matthew Bobrowski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 3:49 PM Jan Stancek wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:21 AM Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 9:27 AM Jan Stancek wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 4:39 PM Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > > > > > > Test multiple groups with evictable mark with ignore mask > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein > > > > --- > > > > .../kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify10.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify10.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify10.c > > > > index b9a50672d..52277d0b7 100644 > > > > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify10.c > > > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fanotify/fanotify10.c > > > > @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ static char event_buf[EVENT_BUF_LEN]; > > > > static int exec_events_unsupported; > > > > static int fan_report_dfid_unsupported; > > > > static int filesystem_mark_unsupported; > > > > +static int evictable_mark_unsupported; > > > > > > > > #define MOUNT_PATH "fs_mnt" > > > > #define MNT2_PATH "mntpoint" > > > > @@ -90,6 +91,10 @@ static int filesystem_mark_unsupported; > > > > #define FILE_EXEC_PATH2 MNT2_PATH"/"TEST_APP > > > > #define FILE2_EXEC_PATH2 MNT2_PATH"/"TEST_APP2 > > > > > > > > +#define DROP_CACHES_FILE "/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" > > > > +#define CACHE_PRESSURE_FILE "/proc/sys/vm/vfs_cache_pressure" > > > > + > > > > +static int old_cache_pressure; > > > > static pid_t child_pid; > > > > static int bind_mount_created; > > > > static unsigned int num_classes = NUM_CLASSES; > > > > @@ -98,12 +103,14 @@ enum { > > > > FANOTIFY_INODE, > > > > FANOTIFY_MOUNT, > > > > FANOTIFY_FILESYSTEM, > > > > + FANOTIFY_EVICTABLE, > > > > }; > > > > > > > > static struct fanotify_mark_type fanotify_mark_types[] = { > > > > INIT_FANOTIFY_MARK_TYPE(INODE), > > > > INIT_FANOTIFY_MARK_TYPE(MOUNT), > > > > INIT_FANOTIFY_MARK_TYPE(FILESYSTEM), > > > > + INIT_FANOTIFY_MARK_TYPE(EVICTABLE), > > > > }; > > > > > > > > static struct tcase { > > > > @@ -289,14 +296,59 @@ static struct tcase { > > > > 0, > > > > FILE_PATH, FAN_OPEN, FAN_OPEN > > > > }, > > > > + /* Evictable ignore mark test cases */ > > > > + { > > > > + "don't ignore mount events created on file with evicted ignore mark", > > > > + MOUNT_PATH, FANOTIFY_MOUNT, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FANOTIFY_EVICTABLE, > > > > + 0, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FAN_OPEN, FAN_OPEN > > > > + }, > > > > + { > > > > + "don't ignore fs events created on a file with evicted ignore mark", > > > > + MOUNT_PATH, FANOTIFY_FILESYSTEM, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FANOTIFY_EVICTABLE, > > > > + 0, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FAN_OPEN, FAN_OPEN > > > > + }, > > > > + { > > > > + "don't ignore mount events created inside a parent with evicted ignore mark", > > > > + MOUNT_PATH, FANOTIFY_MOUNT, > > > > + DIR_PATH, FANOTIFY_EVICTABLE, > > > > + FAN_EVENT_ON_CHILD, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FAN_OPEN, FAN_OPEN > > > > + }, > > > > + { > > > > + "don't ignore fs events created inside a parent with evicted ignore mark", > > > > + MOUNT_PATH, FANOTIFY_FILESYSTEM, > > > > + DIR_PATH, FANOTIFY_EVICTABLE, > > > > + FAN_EVENT_ON_CHILD, > > > > + FILE_PATH, FAN_OPEN, FAN_OPEN > > > > + }, > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > we are seeing some sporadic failures from this last testcase, with > > > recent upstream kernels (v5.19-rc4-14-g941e3e791269). > > > Has anyone also ran into it and knows if it's bug on test side or kernel? Hi Jan, I am traveling so I cannot work on solving the problem for the next week, but I can explain the problem and offer suggestions for short term solutions and maybe a longer term solution. > > > > > > fanotify10.c:496: TINFO: Test #27: don't ignore fs events created > > > inside a parent with evicted ignore mark > > > fanotify10.c:338: TPASS: No fanotify inode marks as expected > > > fanotify10.c:338: TPASS: No fanotify inode marks as expected > > > fanotify10.c:338: TPASS: No fanotify inode marks as expected > > > fanotify10.c:340: TFAIL: Unexpected inode mark (mflags=240, > > > mask=8000020 ignored_mask=20) > > > > It is a test bug. > > The problem is that we want to evict an inode, but there is no > > reliable mechanism to do that. > > > > This is the reason for this workaround in fanotify23: > > > > /* Shrinkers on other fs do not work reliably enough to > > guarantee mark eviction on drop_caches */ > > .dev_fs_type = "ext2", > > > > I did not encounter the problem with fanotify10 myself, but it should > > be the same. > > fanotify10 is not filesystem dependent, so if you can apply the same workaround > > from fanotify23 and it works on your systems we can do that. > > Test is using default fs type, which should already be ext2. I see. You can try xfs on your system to see if it behaves better, because xfs has a specialized inode shriker. > Here's a more complete log from failed test: > https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/arr-cki-prod-datawarehouse-public/datawarehouse-public/2022/06/30/redhat:576928171/build_ppc64le_redhat:576928171_ppc64le/tests/1/results_0001/job.01/recipes/12221009/tasks/8/logs/syscalls.fail.log > Are the failures only in the first test iteration? As a long shot, I would try to remove mount_cycle() from setup(). I see that fanotify23 does not have it and it is not really needed, so it may help fanotify10 pass the first iteration. The problem is that the drop_caches knob is not a reliable way to evict inodes, so when a test like fanotify10 needs to evict an inode, random factors are mixed into the test run. As a quick band aid, I suggest to replace the TFAIL, "Unexpected inode mark" in show_fanotify_marks() with TCONF, because the test failed to setup an "evictable ignored mark that gets evicted", propagate a failure return value from create_fanotify_groups() => show_fanotify_marks() and skip the test case instead of failing it. For long term, it would be nice if LTP could provide a drop_inode_cache() library function that tries harder to make inode eviction work using tricks like fanotify10 and fanotify23 increases vfs_cache_pressure. To pressure memory shrinkers to evict more inodes, need to check the amount of total RAM in the system and dirty pages and add enough dirty memory pages that cannot be evicted to drive the inode shrinker to work harder. Utilizing memory cgroups with some of the new per memcg cache eviction knobs could also be an option, but I did not look into it and not sure on which kernels this is available. Bottom line is that there is a lot of black magic involved with memory shrinkers and as your report shows, hacks and trick may impact different systems in different ways, so it is better it the infrastructure is developed and tested in LTP lib and not in individual tests. Hope this helps. Thanks, Amir. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp