From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sfi-mx-2.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.28.122] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2av4-0007rZ-33 for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:04:34 +0000 Received: from out05.sjc.mx.trendmicro.com ([216.99.131.18]) by sfi-mx-2.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) id 1O2av2-0005vH-HH for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:04:33 +0000 Received: from out04.sjc.mx.trendmicro.com (unknown [216.99.131.8]) by out05.sjc.mx.trendmicro.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E06F3C4BA5 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:33:15 +0000 (UTC) From: "Mitani" References: <000001cadad6$c061c590$412550b0$@co.jp> <4BC487C9.9080300@xenotime.net> <000901cadb78$a2d05080$e870f180$@co.jp> <000601cadbb0$9fb8b5d0$df2a2170$@co.jp> <001301cadc36$77e08cf0$67a1a6d0$@co.jp> <20100415065440.GA6261@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:33:12 +0900 Message-ID: <000601cadd04$c7194450$554bccf0$@co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: ja Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "hugetlb" several tests List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: 'Garrett Cooper' Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Garrett Cooper [mailto:yanegomi@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:43 PM > To: Mitani; Garrett Cooper; ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; > kamimura@ryobi.co.jp > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "hugetlb" several tests > = > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Rishikesh K Rajak > wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 09:56:22AM +0900, Mitani wrote: > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Garrett Cooper [mailto:yanegomi@gmail.com] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 6:31 PM > >> > To: Mitani > >> > Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > >> > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "hugetlb" several tests > >> > > >> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Mitani wrote: > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From: Garrett Cooper [mailto:yanegomi@gmail.com] > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 3:18 PM > >> > >> To: Mitani > >> > >> Cc: Randy Dunlap; ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > >> > >> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "hugetlb" several tests > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Mitani > wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Randy, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > I couldn't notice a misspelling. Sorry. > >> > >> > I decided to use "due to" according to your advice. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > May I suggest revised patch? > >> > >> > > >> > > [...] > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Thank you-- > >> > >> > > >> > >> > -Tomonori Mitani > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> >> From: Randy Dunlap [mailto:rdunlap@xenotime.net] > >> > >> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 12:04 AM > >> > >> >> To: Mitani > >> > >> >> Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > >> > >> >> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix "hugetlb" several tests > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> On 04/12/10 23:58, Mitani wrote: > >> > >> >> > ------------ > >> > >> >> > =A0a) All tests: > >> > >> >> > "TBROK =A0: =A0Test cannot be continued owning to sufficient > >> > >> >> availability of > >> > >> >> > Hugepages on the system" > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > =A0b) 2), 3), 5), 6), 8), 10), 11) tests: > >> > >> >> > "TWARN =A0: =A0tst_rmdir(): TESTDIR was NULL; no removal > >> > attempted" > >> > >> >> > ------------ > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Both case a) and case b) are caused by the same reason. > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > All of case a) failures occured at the following points > (for > >> > >> example > >> > >> >> > hugemmap04): > >> > >> >> > ------------ > >> > >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 /* Check number of hugepages */ > >> > >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 if (get_no_of_hugepages() <=3D 0 || > hugepages_size() > >> > <=3D > >> > >> 0) > >> > >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, "Te= st cannot > be > >> > >> continued > >> > >> >> owning to > >> > >> >> > \ > >> > >> >> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 sufficient > availability > >> > of > >> > >> >> Hugepages on the > >> > >> >> > system"); > >> > >> >> > ------------ > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > I found out that "HugePages_Total" parameter of > "/proc/meminfo" > >> > >> file > >> > >> >> > is set to "0". This caused above TBROK failure. It is > environment > >> > >> >> problem. > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > But, in this case, tests must not return with TBROK, but > with > >> > TCONF, > >> > >> >> > I think. > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> That makes sense to me. > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > And, in case b), these tests try to delete "TESTDIR" > directory > >> > >> by > >> > >> >> > calling "tst_rmdir()" function in "cleanup()" function. > >> > >> >> > But, "TESTDIR" never set if "tst_tmpdir()" function isn't > >> > called. > >> > >> >> > I think that case b)'s tests must not call cleanup() > function. > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > I want to suggest following patch. > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Tomonori Mitani > >> > > >> > =A0 =A0 Sorry to ask again, but Gmail always mangles patches. Could > you > >> > please attach it as a file? > >> > Thanks, > >> > -Garrett > >> > >> > >> Sorry. > >> I attach a patch file. > > > > > > Applied to next branch. Will wait for someone to Acked/test it before > merging to > > master. > = > Inspecting the files more closely, here all cases should be > tst_exit, not cleanup. Otherwise it's going to do some operations not > required as setup hasn't be run yet. > Thanks, > -Garrett HI, There is a problem. In hugeshmget01.c, setup() calling is posted before than the judgment = of hugepages support: ------------ setup(); /* global setup */ /* The following loop checks looping state if -i option given */ if ( get_no_of_hugepages() <=3D 0 || hugepages_size() <=3D 0 ) tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, "Test cannot be continued owning to sufficient avail ability of Hugepages on the system"); else huge_pages_shm_to_be_allocated =3D ( get_no_of_hugepages() * hugepages_size() * 1024) / 2 ; ------------ Therefore, with this order of processing, clean of setup is necessary, = I think Can setup() calling be replaced after the judgment of hugepages support? Perhaps, it's OK, I think ... Regards-- -Tomonori Mitani ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list