[LTP] [PATCH 1/1] lib: Skip tst_{disable, enable}_oom_protection() for non-root
xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com
xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com
Wed Dec 22 07:05:15 CET 2021
Hi Li
> Hi Xu, Petr,
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:26 AM xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com
> <mailto:xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com
> <mailto:xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Petr
> > If needed to set value also for non-root, use set_oom_score_adj().
> If so, why not rename set_oom_score_adj to tst_set_oom_score_adj and
> add
> declartion to tst_memutils.h?
>
>
> Yes, it makes sense to expose this function to users to cover
> more oom test scenarios. For instance, set a high (>0) or low (<0)
> score in child_alloc() to verify if OOM-Killer still works well.
> But so far, we don't have such tests.
>
>
> ps: also have a word typo in set_oom_score_adj, adjustement =>
> adjustment.
>
> Best Regards
> Yang Xu
> >
> > Fixes: 8a0827766d ("lib: add functions to adjust oom score")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel<pvorel@suse.cz <mailto:pvorel@suse.cz>>
> > ---
> > include/tst_memutils.h | 11 ++++++++++-
> > lib/tst_memutils.c | 6 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/tst_memutils.h b/include/tst_memutils.h
> > index 68a6e37714..e6f946ac0c 100644
> > --- a/include/tst_memutils.h
> > +++ b/include/tst_memutils.h
> > @@ -30,11 +30,15 @@ long long tst_available_mem(void);
> > * echo -1000>/proc/$PID/oom_score_adj
> > * If the pid is 0 which means it will set on current(self) process.
> > *
> > + * WARNING:
> > + * Do nothing for non-root, because setting value< 0 requires root.
> > + If you want to set value also for non-root, use
> set_oom_score_adj().
> > + *
> > * Note:
> > * This exported tst_enable_oom_protection function can be used at
> anywhere
> > * you want to protect, but please remember that if you do enable
> protection
> > * on a process($PID) that all the children will inherit its score
> and be
> > - * ignored by OOM Killer as well. So that's why
> tst_disable_oom_protection
> > + * ignored by OOM Killer as well. So that's why
> tst_disable_oom_protection()
> > * to be used in combination.
> > */
> > void tst_enable_oom_protection(pid_t pid);
> > @@ -42,6 +46,11 @@ void tst_enable_oom_protection(pid_t pid);
> > /*
> > * Disable the OOM protection for the process($PID).
> > * echo 0>/proc/$PID/oom_score_adj
> > + *
> > + * WARNING:
> > + * Do nothing for non-root, because it's expected to be cleanup
> after
> > + * tst_enable_oom_protection(). Use set_oom_score_adj(), if you
> want to set
> > + * value also for non-root.
> > */
> > void tst_disable_oom_protection(pid_t pid);
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/tst_memutils.c b/lib/tst_memutils.c
> > index 4346508d9a..f0695e026a 100644
> > --- a/lib/tst_memutils.c
> > +++ b/lib/tst_memutils.c
> > @@ -126,10 +126,16 @@ static void set_oom_score_adj(pid_t pid,
> int value)
> >
> > void tst_enable_oom_protection(pid_t pid)
> > {
> > + if (geteuid() != 0)
>
>
> This is not working as expected in Github CI. I'm still looking at the
> problem.
> https://github.com/wangli5665/ltp/runs/4602025797?check_suite_focus=true
I tested local but it works well. I guess ci fails because of linux user
namespace. Maybe we should require CAP_SYS_RESOURCE cap instead of using
geteuid.
Best Regards
Yang Xu
>
> And the worth mentioning, maybe better to do this check
> in set_oom_score_adj() if we do not decide to expose
> that function to user.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Li Wang
More information about the ltp
mailing list