From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933967AbbEMQdA (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 12:33:00 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:47915 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752111AbbEMQc4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2015 12:32:56 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 50.43.43.179 Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:32:47 -0700 From: Josh Triplett To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 2/3] rcutorture: Test both RCU-sched and RCU-bh for Tiny RCU Message-ID: <20150513163246.GC21894@x> References: <20150512224855.GA4776@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1431470953-4910-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1431470953-4910-2-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150513005929.GE14292@cloud> <20150513130728.GX6776@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150513130728.GX6776@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 06:07:28AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 05:59:29PM -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 03:49:12PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > From: "Paul E. McKenney" > > > > > > Reported-by: "Ahmed, Iftekhar" > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > Could you elaborate a bit more on this patch (ideally in its commit > > message)? I see an addition of a command-line parameter to test rcu_bh; > > is rcu-sched already tested elsewhere by some other config, or does this > > parameter somehow enable testing both? > > The commit log now reads as follows, does that help? > > Thanx, Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > rcutorture: Test both RCU-sched and RCU-bh for Tiny RCU > > Tiny RCU supports both RCU-sched and RCU-bh, but only RCU-sched is > currently tested by the rcutorture scripts. This commit therefore > changes the TINY02 configuration to test RCU-bh, with TINY01 continuing > to test RCU-sched. > > This shortcoming of the current rcutorture tests was located by mutation > testing by Iftekhar. The idea behind mutation testing is to automatically > mutate the code under test. If a given mutant is not caught by testing, > this is a hint that the testing might need to be improved, as was the > case here. Note that this is only a hint because it is possible to mutate > the code into something else that still works. For example, a mutation > that removes (say) a WARN_ON() will not normally result in a test failure. > > This change resulted in the test failure caused by list mishandling, > which is fixed by the next commit. > > Reported-by: "Ahmed, Iftekhar" > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > Much better, thanks. In particular, the information about TINY01 and TINY02 was not obvious from the patch. Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett