Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 11:54:16 -0700
From:   Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
To:     Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc:     void@manifault.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        mhocko@kernel.org, shakeelb@google.com, tj@kernel.org,
        Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] selftests: memcg: Expect no low events in
 unprotected sibling
Message-ID: <Yn6pWPodGPlz+D8G@carbon>
References: <20220512174452.tr34tuh4k5jm6qjs@dev0025.ash9.facebook.com>
 <20220513171811.730-1-mkoutny@suse.com>
 <20220513171811.730-3-mkoutny@suse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220513171811.730-3-mkoutny@suse.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 07:18:09PM +0200, Michal Koutny wrote:
> This is effectively a revert of commit cdc69458a5f3 ("cgroup: account
> for memory_recursiveprot in test_memcg_low()"). The case test_memcg_low
> will fail with memory_recursiveprot until resolved in reclaim
> code.

Hm, what are our plans here? Are we going to fix it soon-ish, or there
is still no agreement on how to proceed?