RE: Re: 3.0-testing

RE: Re: 3.0-testing

[Ian Pratt]

> Since the semantics of the tree is a bit different from 
> 2.0-testing might it make sense to use a different name, e.g. pre-3.0?

Not so different. Changing tree names is actually a pain in the butt, so
I think 3.0-testing is actually OK. We will then fork 3.0 from it when
we're ready for a release (and tag it 3.0.0), and 3.0-testing will be
strictly bug fixes only. 

We're not intending to do any checkins to -unstable until 3.0 is
released. In fact, we might start off soft linking the -unstable repo to
-3.0-testing.
 
> Also, will the 3.0-testing tree be appropriate to roll in 
> common-izing changes (i.e. abstracting out x86-isms) in 
> drivers and xc?  These should be low risk to x86_* as they 
> will simply be syntactic, e.g. moving inline code into macros 
> or separate functions.  If so, I'd like to arrange some time 
> to work on this at OLS?

I'd have rather hoped stuff like this would have already been discussed
and posted :-(

Anyhow, we can try and find time to discuss this at OLS with both you
and Jimi, Hollis et al. 


Ian

RE: 3.0-testing

[Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)]

>    1. 3.0-testing (Ian Pratt)
>  * New regression test suite. We're working on a sophisticated test
> suite that will run a wide range of benchmarks and test programs
> [lmbench, ttcp, ltp, kernbench, reaim, postmark, osdb/postgresql, ace
> tcp_test, specjbb, tbench, dbench, crashme] under a variety of
> situations [UP and SMP domains, multiple concurrent domains,
> communicating domains etc.] The final phase of the test will also
> exercise the tools, adding/removing CPUs, adding/removing memory,
> migrating domains etc. This is going to be a really good work out for
> xen and guest kernels. Stay tuned...

(Sorry about the strange reply/subject.  It appears gmane is down (which
is
my usual method for followup since I subscribe to the digest version.)

Sounds cool!  Will this be available for others to use?

It would be great if the suite is well parameterized so it is possible
to easily turn off individual tests or classes of tests.  Then it
can be used by ports that are not as far along as x86.

Dan

Re: RE: 3.0-testing

[Tom Wilkie]

Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
>>   1. 3.0-testing (Ian Pratt)
>> * New regression test suite. We're working on a sophisticated test
>>suite that will run a wide range of benchmarks and test programs
>>[lmbench, ttcp, ltp, kernbench, reaim, postmark, osdb/postgresql, ace
>>tcp_test, specjbb, tbench, dbench, crashme] under a variety of
>>situations [UP and SMP domains, multiple concurrent domains,
>>communicating domains etc.] The final phase of the test will also
>>exercise the tools, adding/removing CPUs, adding/removing memory,
>>migrating domains etc. This is going to be a really good work out for
>>xen and guest kernels. Stay tuned...
> 
> 
> (Sorry about the strange reply/subject.  It appears gmane is down (which
> is
> my usual method for followup since I subscribe to the digest version.)
> 
> Sounds cool!  Will this be available for others to use?

The idea is it will eventually be released, but we're still developing 
it atm.

> 
> It would be great if the suite is well parameterized so it is possible
> to easily turn off individual tests or classes of tests.  Then it
> can be used by ports that are not as far along as x86.

Thats the idea yeah.

Tom

> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: RE: 3.0-testing

[Paul Larson]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1407 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 06:55 -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort
Collins) wrote:
> >    1. 3.0-testing (Ian Pratt)
> >  * New regression test suite. We're working on a sophisticated test
> > suite that will run a wide range of benchmarks and test programs
> > [lmbench, ttcp, ltp, kernbench, reaim, postmark, osdb/postgresql, ace
> > tcp_test, specjbb, tbench, dbench, crashme] under a variety of
> > situations [UP and SMP domains, multiple concurrent domains,
> > communicating domains etc.] The final phase of the test will also
> > exercise the tools, adding/removing CPUs, adding/removing memory,
> > migrating domains etc. This is going to be a really good work out for
> > xen and guest kernels. Stay tuned...
> 
> (Sorry about the strange reply/subject.  It appears gmane is down (which
> is
> my usual method for followup since I subscribe to the digest version.)
> 
> Sounds cool!  Will this be available for others to use?
> 
> It would be great if the suite is well parameterized so it is possible
> to easily turn off individual tests or classes of tests.  Then it
> can be used by ports that are not as far along as x86.
Have you looked at Xentest?  Xentest lets you very easily add/remove
tests with a few lines in a config file.  We should be making an updated
release soon.

-- 
Thanks,
Paul Larson
plars@linuxtestproject.org
http://www.linuxtestproject.org

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

RE: RE: 3.0-testing

[Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)]

> Have you looked at Xentest?  Xentest lets you very easily add/remove
> tests with a few lines in a config file.  We should be making 
> an updated
> release soon.

Can you provide a pointer?  Google doesn't find much.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Larson [mailto:plars@linuxtestproject.org] 
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:24 AM
> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: 3.0-testing
> 
> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 06:55 -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort
> Collins) wrote:
> > >    1. 3.0-testing (Ian Pratt)
> > >  * New regression test suite. We're working on a 
> sophisticated test
> > > suite that will run a wide range of benchmarks and test programs
> > > [lmbench, ttcp, ltp, kernbench, reaim, postmark, 
> osdb/postgresql, ace
> > > tcp_test, specjbb, tbench, dbench, crashme] under a variety of
> > > situations [UP and SMP domains, multiple concurrent domains,
> > > communicating domains etc.] The final phase of the test will also
> > > exercise the tools, adding/removing CPUs, adding/removing memory,
> > > migrating domains etc. This is going to be a really good 
> work out for
> > > xen and guest kernels. Stay tuned...
> > 
> > (Sorry about the strange reply/subject.  It appears gmane 
> is down (which
> > is
> > my usual method for followup since I subscribe to the 
> digest version.)
> > 
> > Sounds cool!  Will this be available for others to use?
> > 
> > It would be great if the suite is well parameterized so it 
> is possible
> > to easily turn off individual tests or classes of tests.  Then it
> > can be used by ports that are not as far along as x86.
> Have you looked at Xentest?  Xentest lets you very easily add/remove
> tests with a few lines in a config file.  We should be making 
> an updated
> release soon.
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Paul Larson
> plars@linuxtestproject.org
> http://www.linuxtestproject.org
> 

Re: RE: 3.0-testing

[Paul Larson]

Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:

>>Have you looked at Xentest?  Xentest lets you very easily add/remove
>>tests with a few lines in a config file.  We should be making 
>>an updated
>>release soon.
>>    
>>
>
>Can you provide a pointer?  Google doesn't find much.
>  
>
The xen-devl mailing list archives would be a better place to look.  
I'll be making another release later this week too if you'd like to just 
wait for that.  The new version has a much better results directory 
layout, a facility for specifying patches to apply against the xen tree 
before building it, and several fixes.

Thanks,
Paul Larson