OpenVZ / Virtuozzo kernel development (devel@openvz.org)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>
To: Eva Kurchatova <eva.kurchatova@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: devel@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 3/5] selftests: bpf: size the map in test_lru_sanity3 to whole refills
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 14:11:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <179025186193.3195055.17480934750061166750.b4-review@b4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260831234217.1649428-3-eva.kurchatova@virtuozzo.com>

> The test fills a map of tgt_free * 2 elements and then reads back all
> but the last few, which fails on a machine with six cpus:
> 
>   test_lru_sanity3 (map_type:9 map_flags:0x0): test_lru_map.c:463:
>   test_lru_sanity3: Assertion `!bpf_map_lookup_elem_with_ref_bit(
>   lru_map_fd, key, value)' failed.
> 
> The elements are handed out in refills of lru->target_free, which the
> kernel derives from the map size as clamp((size / nr_cpus) / 2, 1,
> LOCAL_FREE_TARGET), 21 for a 256 element map and six cpus. A refill
> the global free list cannot satisfy in full does not stop there, it
> calls __bpf_lru_list_shrink() for the remainder, and that evicts
> elements which are still live. 256 is not a multiple of 21, so filling
> the map ends on a partial refill that drops 17 of the elements the test
> goes on to reference, and the lookup fails on the first of them.
> 
> Whether the size divides evenly depends on the cpu count alone, which
> is why this passes on two and on sixty four cpus and fails on six.
> 
> batch_size is already __tgt_size(tgt_free), the refill size of a map
> of __map_size(batch_size) elements, so size the map that way and the
> fill consumes whole refills and evicts nothing. Start the keys of the
> last insert at map_size + 1, they were placed just past the old size.
> 
> Fixes: 5e9388f7984a ("selftests/bpf: adapt one more case in test_lru_map to the new target_free")
> https://virtuozzo.atlassian.net/browse/VSTOR-139677
> Feature: fix selftests
> Signed-off-by: Eva Kurchatova <eva.kurchatova@virtuozzo.com>
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_lru_map.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_lru_map.c
> index 0921939532c6c..fc67a337d3c1b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_lru_map.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_lru_map.c
> @@ -441,8 +441,18 @@ static void test_lru_sanity3(int map_type, int map_flags, unsigned int tgt_free)
>  	assert(sched_next_online(0, &next_cpu) != -1);
>  
>  	batch_size = __tgt_size(tgt_free);
> +	if (!batch_size)
> +		batch_size = 1;

Regression: the line

      if (!batch_size)
              batch_size = 1;

breaks the test for nr_cpus > 128. The old test degenerated there:
__tgt_size(128) is 0, nothing is inserted after the fill, map_equal()
passes trivially. The new test builds a map of 2 * nr_cpus elements with
target_free = 1. On the last insert the inactive list holds more than
nr_scans (128) referenced elements ahead of the single unreferenced one,
__bpf_lru_list_shrink_inactive() never reaches it, __bpf_lru_list_shrink()
falls through to the forced shrink and evicts a live key. The model fails
on 129, 144, 160, 192, 256, 384 and 512 cpus (256 cpus: key 257 is
gone, key 512 stays). Two-socket nodes and VMs with a large maxcpus have
that many possible cpus.

Suggested fix: when __tgt_size(tgt_free) is 0, print Skip and return
instead of forcing batch_size to 1. That keeps the old behaviour on large
machines and still fixes 3-64 cpus.

> +
> +	/* The local free list is refilled lru->target_free elements at a
> +	 * time, and a refill the global free list cannot satisfy in full
> +	 * shrinks the LRU list, which evicts elements that are still live.
> +	 * Size the map so that target_free divides it, otherwise filling it
> +	 * ends on a partial refill and evicts the elements referenced below.
> +	 */
> +	map_size = __map_size(batch_size);
> +	assert(__tgt_size(map_size) == batch_size);

assert(__tgt_size(map_size) == batch_size) is a tautology,
(b * n * 2 / n) / 2 == b holds for every b and n, so it checks nothing.

-- 
Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

  reply	other threads:[~2026-09-24 12:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-31 23:41 [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 1/5] ms/selftests/bpf: Use local type for bpf_fou_encap in test_tunnel_kern Eva Kurchatova
2026-08-31 23:41 ` [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 2/5] selftests: bpf: run test_xdp_features in its own netns Eva Kurchatova
2026-09-24 12:24   ` Konstantin Khorenko
2026-08-31 23:41 ` [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 3/5] selftests: bpf: size the map in test_lru_sanity3 to whole refills Eva Kurchatova
2026-09-24 12:11   ` Konstantin Khorenko [this message]
2026-09-24 12:23   ` Konstantin Khorenko
2026-08-31 23:41 ` [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 4/5] selftests: bpf: run test_sock and test_tunnel in their own netns Eva Kurchatova
2026-09-24 12:24   ` Konstantin Khorenko
2026-08-31 23:41 ` [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 5/5] selftests: bpf: use the bpftool built with the tests in test_bpftool_map Eva Kurchatova
2026-09-24 12:25   ` Konstantin Khorenko
2026-09-24 12:24 ` [Devel] [PATCH vz10 v2 1/5] ms/selftests/bpf: Use local type for bpf_fou_encap in test_tunnel_kern Konstantin Khorenko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=179025186193.3195055.17480934750061166750.b4-review@b4 \
    --to=khorenko@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=devel@openvz.org \
    --cc=eva.kurchatova@virtuozzo.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox