From patchwork Fri May 2 01:04:43 2025 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Waiman Long X-Patchwork-Id: 886792 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5DB3176242 for ; Fri, 2 May 2025 01:05:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746147911; cv=none; b=O5ZSJ/KLQyGf/C1HzHANs4pfNP7kRIj89F4F/eCBbS0eM0t/bdghs9gWxNDkQA2d3ri2aNJToHitpRBXNcm6wl8lw/VRYHXMHCNoBwvosXwoS0+oFBk7QQi28NmBVFMtH1HmZTVy3uvlG6lreax2e4JyrC4XnlSsBpTQHHeQK2Q= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746147911; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WuUNHPlcI34OGoe9k9uvk9UDw9MeHqo8z2kKd7VdYWk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=nvKKWiJ6+C5INUIML5f7UiJzHODfEP6tax17YeyBF3jjCpIpoM2VLKszJbY0aFE5CgT4LM0nfOM799R/OF3+jEhixqvlcA2gUuhsnwOt3S11et1KZ077XweJ6AbLbI+QKvzrCG30HNUelrHkNCSq5d6sPZgBExOrd95EOYGxq2E= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=P0ti9ZRO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="P0ti9ZRO" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1746147908; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=owySU7dSCB78ZpCQgHbvTjigjXxf+YL8mNc7nb45BJM=; b=P0ti9ZROex4HrH45lGA0AV5VOEnFXVbN36vDu+HBJne7AP5cjVM0+1Raj5kLQR6gc6ES0N SU9JkWKJ2ID2d6SnmaDkk7ydRbKDSA+SfcK1QNyS1gdw4WqjiljppXGM6GzeTRFt1WykK8 QGTwCoVJPBXQuLowi1M+8iYTs1AGURk= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-530-KfkMnat2MGqM4eXr5_nv4A-1; Thu, 01 May 2025 21:05:02 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KfkMnat2MGqM4eXr5_nv4A-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: KfkMnat2MGqM4eXr5_nv4A_1746147900 Received: from mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.40]) (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 mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DC641800264; Fri, 2 May 2025 01:05:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from llong-thinkpadp16vgen1.westford.csb (unknown [10.22.80.189]) by mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5377719560A3; Fri, 2 May 2025 01:04:57 +0000 (UTC) From: Waiman Long To: Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin , Shakeel Butt , Muchun Song , Andrew Morton , Tejun Heo , =?utf-8?q?Michal_Koutn=C3=BD?= , Shuah Khan Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Waiman Long Subject: [PATCH v8 2/2] selftests: memcg: Increase error tolerance of child memory.current check in test_memcg_protection() Date: Thu, 1 May 2025 21:04:43 -0400 Message-ID: <20250502010443.106022-3-longman@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20250502010443.106022-1-longman@redhat.com> References: <20250502010443.106022-1-longman@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.40 The test_memcg_protection() function is used for the test_memcg_min and test_memcg_low sub-tests. This function generates a set of parent/child cgroups like: parent: memory.min/low = 50M child 0: memory.min/low = 75M, memory.current = 50M child 1: memory.min/low = 25M, memory.current = 50M child 2: memory.min/low = 0, memory.current = 50M After applying memory pressure, the function expects the following actual memory usages. parent: memory.current ~= 50M child 0: memory.current ~= 29M child 1: memory.current ~= 21M child 2: memory.current ~= 0 In reality, the actual memory usages can differ quite a bit from the expected values. It uses an error tolerance of 10% with the values_close() helper. Both the test_memcg_min and test_memcg_low sub-tests can fail sporadically because the actual memory usage exceeds the 10% error tolerance. Below are a sample of the usage data of the tests runs that fail. Child Actual usage Expected usage %err ----- ------------ -------------- ---- 1 16990208 22020096 -12.9% 1 17252352 22020096 -12.1% 0 37699584 30408704 +10.7% 1 14368768 22020096 -21.0% 1 16871424 22020096 -13.2% The current 10% error tolerenace might be right at the time test_memcontrol.c was first introduced in v4.18 kernel, but memory reclaim have certainly evolved quite a bit since then which may result in a bit more run-to-run variation than previously expected. Increase the error tolerance to 15% for child 0 and 20% for child 1 to minimize the chance of this type of failure. The tolerance is bigger for child 1 because an upswing in child 0 corresponds to a smaller %err than a similar downswing in child 1 due to the way %err is used in values_close(). Before this patch, a 100 test runs of test_memcontrol produced the following results: 17 not ok 1 test_memcg_min 22 not ok 2 test_memcg_low After applying this patch, there were no test failure for test_memcg_min and test_memcg_low in 100 test runs. However, these tests may still fail once in a while if the memory usage goes beyond the newly extended range. Signed-off-by: Waiman Long --- tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c index 58602c1831f1..d6534d7301a2 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c @@ -496,10 +496,10 @@ static int test_memcg_protection(const char *root, bool min) for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(children); i++) c[i] = cg_read_long(children[i], "memory.current"); - if (!values_close(c[0], MB(29), 10)) + if (!values_close(c[0], MB(29), 15)) goto cleanup; - if (!values_close(c[1], MB(21), 10)) + if (!values_close(c[1], MB(21), 20)) goto cleanup; if (c[3] != 0)