Make sure that we ignore protection of a memcg that is the target of memcg
reclaim.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20221202031512.1365483-4-yosryahmed@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vasily Averin <vasily.averin@linux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Refactor the code that drives writing to memory.reclaim (retrying, error
handling, etc) from test_memcg_reclaim() to a helper called
reclaim_until(), which proactively reclaims from a memcg until its usage
reaches a certain value.
While we are at it, refactor and simplify the reclaim loop.
This will be used in a following patch in another test.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20221202031512.1365483-3-yosryahmed@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Suggested-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vasily Averin <vasily.averin@linux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
The memory protection test setup and runtime is almost equal for
memory.low and memory.min cases.
It makes modification of the common parts prone to mistakes, since the
protections are similar not only in setup but also in principle, factor
the common part out.
Past exceptions between the tests:
- missing memory.min is fine (kept),
- test_memcg_low protected orphaned pagecache (adapted like
test_memcg_min and we keep the processes of protected memory running).
The evaluation in two tests is different (OOM of allocator vs low events
of protégés), this is kept different.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-6-mkoutny@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
The reclaim is triggered by memory limit in a subtree, therefore the
testcase does not need configured protection against external reclaim.
Also, correct respective comments.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-5-mkoutny@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
The numbers are not easy to derive in a closed form (certainly mere
protections ratios do not apply), therefore use a simulation to obtain
expected numbers.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-4-mkoutny@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
This is effectively a revert of commit cdc69458a5 ("cgroup: account for
memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low()"). The case test_memcg_low will
fail with memory_recursiveprot until resolved in reclaim code.
However, this patch preserves the existing helpers and variables for later
uses.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-3-mkoutny@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Patch series "memcontrol selftests fixups", v2.
Flushing the patches to make memcontrol selftests check the events
behavior we had consensus about (test_memcg_low fails).
(test_memcg_reclaim, test_memcg_swap_max fail for me now but it's present
even before the refactoring.)
The two bigger changes are:
- adjustment of the protected values to make tests succeed with the given
tolerance,
- both test_memcg_low and test_memcg_min check protection of memory in
populated cgroups (actually as per Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst
memory.min should not apply to empty cgroups, which is not the case
currently. Therefore I unified tests with the populated case in order to to
bring more broken tests).
This patch (of 5):
This fixes mis-applied changes from commit 72b1e03aa7 ("cgroup: account
for memory_localevents in test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events()").
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-1-mkoutny@suse.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220518161859.21565-2-mkoutny@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
If the first goto is taken, 'fd' is not opened yet (and is un-initialized).
So a direct return is safer.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/628312312eb40e0e39463a2c06415fde5295c716.1653229120.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr
Fixes: c1a31a2f7a ("cgroup: fix racy check in alloc_pagecache_max_30M() helper function")
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
alloc_pagecache_max_30M() in the cgroup memcg tests performs a 50MB
pagecache allocation, which it expects to be capped at 30MB due to the
calling process having a memory.high setting of 30MB. After the
allocation, the function contains a check that verifies that MB(29) <
memory.current <= MB(30). This check can actually fail
non-deterministically.
The testcases that use this function are test_memcg_high() and
test_memcg_max(), which set memory.min and memory.max to 30MB respectively
for the cgroup under test. The allocation can slightly exceed this number
in both cases, and for memory.max, the process performing the allocation
will not have the OOM killer invoked as it's performing a pagecache
allocation. This patchset therefore updates the above check to instead
use the verify_close() helper function.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-6-void@manifault.com
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
test_memcg_sock() in the cgroup memcg tests, verifies expected memory
accounting for sockets. The test forks a process which functions as a TCP
server, and sends large buffers back and forth between itself (as the TCP
client) and the forked TCP server. While doing so, it verifies that
memory.current and memory.stat.sock look correct.
There is currently a check in tcp_client() which asserts memory.current >=
memory.stat.sock. This check is racy, as between memory.current and
memory.stat.sock being queried, a packet could come in which causes
mem_cgroup_charge_skmem() to be invoked. This could cause
memory.stat.sock to exceed memory.current. Reversing the order of
querying doesn't address the problem either, as memory may be reclaimed
between the two calls. Instead, this patch just removes that assertion
altogether, and instead relies on the values_close() check that follows to
validate the expected accounting.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-5-void@manifault.com
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
The test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() testcase in the cgroup memcg tests
validates that processes in a group that perform allocations exceeding
memory.oom.group are killed. It also validates that the
memory.events.oom_kill events are properly propagated in this case.
Commit 06e11c907ea4 ("kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events
test") fixed test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events() to account for the fact
that the memory.events.oom_kill events in a child cgroup is propagated up
to its parent. This behavior can actually be configured by the
memory_localevents mount option, so this patch updates the testcase to
properly account for the possible presence of this mount option.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-4-void@manifault.com
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
The test_memcg_low() testcase in test_memcontrol.c verifies the expected
behavior of groups using the memory.low knob. Part of the testcase
verifies that a group with memory.low that experiences reclaim due to
memory pressure elsewhere in the system, observes memory.events.low events
as a result of that reclaim.
In commit 8a931f8013 ("mm: memcontrol: recursive memory.low
protection"), the memory controller was updated to propagate memory.low
and memory.min protection from a parent group to its children via a
configurable memory_recursiveprot mount option. This unfortunately broke
the memcg tests, which asserts that a sibling that experienced reclaim but
had a memory.low value of 0, would not observe any memory.low events.
This patch updates test_memcg_low() to account for the new behavior
introduced by memory_recursiveprot.
So as to make the test resilient to multiple configurations, the patch
also adds a new proc_mount_contains() helper that checks for a string in
/proc/mounts, and is used to toggle behavior based on whether the default
memory_recursiveprot was present.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-3-void@manifault.com
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Patch series "Fix bugs in memcontroller cgroup tests", v2.
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.
This patch (of 5):
In test_memcg_min() and test_memcg_low(), there is an array of four
sibling cgroups. All but one of these sibling groups does a 50MB
allocation, and the group that does no allocation is the third of four in
the array. This is not a problem per se, but makes it a bit tricky to do
some assertions in test_memcg_low(), as we want to make assertions on the
siblings based on whether or not they performed allocations. Having a
static index before which all groups have performed an allocation makes
this cleaner.
This patch therefore reorders the sibling groups so that the group that
performs no allocations is the last in the array. A follow-on patch will
leverage this to fix a bug in the test that incorrectly asserts that a
sibling group that had performed an allocation, but only had protection
from its parent, will not observe any memory.events.low events during
reclaim.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-1-void@manifault.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220423155619.3669555-2-void@manifault.com
Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Add a new test for memory.reclaim that verifies that the interface
correctly reclaims memory as intended, from both anon and file pages.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220425190040.2475377-5-yosryahmed@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: "Michal Koutn" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Currently, alloc_anon_noexit() calls alloc_anon() which instantly frees
the allocated memory. alloc_anon_noexit() is usually used with
cg_run_nowait() to run a process in the background that allocates
memory. It makes sense for the background process to keep the memory
allocated and not instantly free it (otherwise there is no point of
running it in the background).
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220425190040.2475377-4-yosryahmed@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: "Michal Koutn" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
After commit 0e4b01df86 ("mm, memcg: throttle allocators when failing
reclaim over memory.high") allocating memory over memory.high became very
time consuming. But it's exactly what the memory.high test from cgroup
kselftests is doing: it tries to allocate 100M with 30M memory.high value.
It takes forever to complete.
In order to keep it passing (or failing) in a reasonable amount of time
let's try to allocate only a little over 30M: 31M to be precise.
With this change test_memcontrol finishes in a reasonable amount of
time:
$ time ./test_memcontrol
ok 1 test_memcg_subtree_control
ok 2 test_memcg_current
ok 3 test_memcg_min
ok 4 test_memcg_low
ok 5 test_memcg_high
ok 6 test_memcg_max
ok 7 test_memcg_oom_events
ok 8 test_memcg_swap_max
ok 9 test_memcg_sock
ok 10 test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events
ok 11 test_memcg_oom_group_parent_events
ok 12 test_memcg_oom_group_score_events
real 0m2.273s
user 0m0.064s
sys 0m0.739s
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220415000133.3955987-3-roman.gushchin@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Patch series "mm: memcg kselftests fixes".
This patch (of 4):
Commit 9852ae3fe5 ("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.
It broke the oom group leaf events test: it assumes that after an OOM the
oom_kill counter is zero on parent's level.
Let's adjust the test: it should have similar expectations for the child
and parent levels.
The test passes after this fix.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220415000133.3955987-2-roman.gushchin@linux.dev
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220415000133.3955987-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Test the enforcement of memory.high limit for large amount of memory
allocation within a single kernel entry. There are valid use-cases
where the application can trigger large amount of memory allocation
within a single syscall e.g. mlock() or mmap(MAP_POPULATE).
Make sure memory.high limit enforcement works for such use-cases.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220211064917.2028469-4-shakeelb@google.com
Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
The cgroup testing relies on the root cgroup's subtree_control setting,
If the 'memory' controller isn't set, all test cases will be failed
as following:
$ sudo ./test_memcontrol
not ok 1 test_memcg_subtree_control
not ok 2 test_memcg_current
ok 3 # skip test_memcg_min
not ok 4 test_memcg_low
not ok 5 test_memcg_high
not ok 6 test_memcg_max
not ok 7 test_memcg_oom_events
ok 8 # skip test_memcg_swap_max
not ok 9 test_memcg_sock
not ok 10 test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events
not ok 11 test_memcg_oom_group_parent_events
not ok 12 test_memcg_oom_group_score_events
To correct this unexpected failure, this patch write the 'memory' to
subtree_control of root to get a right result.
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jay Kamat <jgkamat@fb.com>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Dan reported, that cleanup path in test_memcg_subtree_control()
triggers a static checker warning:
./tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c:76 \
test_memcg_subtree_control()
error: uninitialized symbol 'child2'.
Fix this by initializing child2 and parent2 variables and
split the cleanup path into few stages.
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Fixes: 84092dbcf9 ("selftests: cgroup: add memory controller self-tests")
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Add tests for memory.oom.group for the following cases:
- Killing all processes in a leaf cgroup, but leaving the
parent untouched
- Killing all processes in a parent and leaf cgroup
- Keeping processes marked by OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN alive when considered
for being killed by the group oom killer.
Signed-off-by: Jay Kamat <jgkamat@fb.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>
The test verifies that when there is active TCP connection, the
memory.stat.sock and memory.current values are close.
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>
The new test verifies that memory.swap.max and memory.swap.current behave
as expected for simple allocation scenarios
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>
Cgroups are used for controlling the physical resource distribution
(memory, CPU, io, etc) and often are used as basic building blocks
for large distributed computing systems. Even small differences
in the actual behavior may lead to significant incidents.
The codebase is under the active development, which will unlikely
stop at any time soon. Also it's scattered over different kernel
subsystems, which makes regressions more probable.
Given that, the lack of any tests is crying.
This patch implements some basic tests for the memory controller,
as well as a minimal required framework. It doesn't pretend for a
very good coverage, but pretends to be a starting point.
Hopefully, any following significant changes will include corresponding
tests.
Tests for CPU and io controllers, as well as cgroup core
are next in the todo list.
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: kernel-team@fb.com
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@kernel.org>
