On Sun, Dec 21, 2025 at 5:52 PM David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12/21/25 10:35, Li Wang wrote: > > David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 12/21/25 09:58, Li Wang wrote: > >>> The hugetlb cgroup usage wait loops in charge_reserved_hugetlb.sh were > >>> unbounded and could hang forever if the expected cgroup file value never > >>> appears (e.g. due to bugs, timing issues, or unexpected behavior). > >> > >> Did you actually hit that in practice? Just wondering. > > > > Yes. > > > > On an aarch64 64k setup with 512MB hugepages, the test failed earlier > > (hugetlbfs got mounted with an effective size of 0 due to size=256M), so > > write_to_hugetlbfs couldn’t allocate the expected pages. After that, the > > script’s wait loops never observed the target value, so they spun forever. > > Okay, so essentially what you fix in patch #3, correct? > > It might make sense to reorder #2 and #3, and likely current #3 should > get a Fixes: tag.
+1 > Then you can just briefly describe here that this was previously hit due > to other tests issues. Although I wonder how much value this patch here > as after #3 is in. But it looks like a cleanup and the timeout of 60s > sounds reasonable. The reason is that I improved the infinite loop before debugging the #3 issue. But your suggestion makes sense, and I will reorder patch #2 and #3. -- Regards, Li Wang
