Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] cgroup/rstat: Selftests for niced CPU statistics

[Joshua Hahn]

> My motivation comes from debugging cgroup selftests when strace is quite
> useful and your implementation adds the unnecessary fork which makes the
> strace (slightly) less readable.

This makes sense, thank you for the context. I hadn't considered debugging
considerations much, but I can imagine that it becomes harder to read
once the code & strace becomes clogged up.

> > Do you think that this increase in granularity / accuracy is worth the
> > increase in code complexity? I do agree that it would be much easier
> > to read if there was no fork.
>
> I think both changes (no cg_run or cpu_hog_func_param extension) could
> be reasonably small changes (existing usages of cpu_hog_func_param
> extension would default to zero nice, so the actual change would only be
> in hog_cpus_timed()).

I think I will stick with the no cg_run option. Initially, I had
wanted to use it
to maintain the same style with the other selftests in test_cpu.c, but I think
it creates more unnecessary unreadability.

Thank you again,
Joshua