diff mbox series

[v2,1/3] kselftest/cgroup: fix unexpected testing failure on test_memcontrol

Message ID 20190520030140.203605-2-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series [v2,1/3] kselftest/cgroup: fix unexpected testing failure on test_memcontrol | expand

Commit Message

Alex Shi May 20, 2019, 3:01 a.m. UTC 
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>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

Comments

Tejun Heo May 24, 2019, 9:40 p.m. UTC | #1 
Hello,

All three patches look good to me.  Please feel free to add my
acked-by.  Shuah, should I route these through cgroup tree or would
the kselftest tree be a better fit?

Thanks.
shuah May 24, 2019, 9:44 p.m. UTC | #2 
On 5/24/19 3:40 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> All three patches look good to me.  Please feel free to add my
> acked-by.  Shuah, should I route these through cgroup tree or would
> the kselftest tree be a better fit?
> 
> Thanks.
> 


Tejun, I can take them through kselftest tree.

thanks,
-- Shuah
shuah May 25, 2019, 12:06 a.m. UTC | #3 
On 5/24/19 3:44 PM, shuah wrote:
> On 5/24/19 3:40 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> All three patches look good to me.  Please feel free to add my
>> acked-by.  Shuah, should I route these through cgroup tree or would
>> the kselftest tree be a better fit?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> 
> 
> Tejun, I can take them through kselftest tree.
> 

Alex,

patches 1/3 and 2/3 failed checkpatch. Could you please the warns
and send v3. Go ahead and send all v3 for all 3 patches

thanks,
-- Shuah
Alex Shi May 27, 2019, 6:30 a.m. UTC | #4 
On 2019/5/25 8:06 上午, shuah wrote:
> Alex,
> 
> patches 1/3 and 2/3 failed checkpatch. Could you please the warns
> and send v3. Go ahead and send all v3 for all 3 patches

fixed and rent. 

Thanks a lot! 
Alex
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
index 6f339882a6ca..73612d604a2a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c
@@ -1205,6 +1205,10 @@  int main(int argc, char **argv)
 	if (cg_read_strstr(root, "cgroup.controllers", "memory"))
 		ksft_exit_skip("memory controller isn't available\n");
 
+	if (cg_read_strstr(root, "cgroup.subtree_control", "memory"))
+	    if (cg_write(root, "cgroup.subtree_control", "+memory"))
+		ksft_exit_skip("Failed to set root memory controller\n");
+
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); i++) {
 		switch (tests[i].fn(root)) {
 		case KSFT_PASS: