Re: [LTP] Patch suggested inside LTP memcg stress test case 'memcg_stress_test.sh'.

[Subrata Modak <subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Thanks. I have merged your patch. However you need to address the
following things in future:

     1. All patches need to have a DCO signoff like: Signed-off-by:
        Shubham <shubham@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
     2. Create all your patches from LTP root: like:
diff -uprN ltp-*/testcases/*..*/file.orig ltp-*/testcases/*..*/file

Regards--
Subrata

On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 14:20 +0530, Shubham wrote:
> Hi,
>      We have found out a cgroup test case issue with
> 'ltp-full-20100331/testcases/kernel/controllers/memcg/stress/memcg_stress_test.sh'. The sniff of test case function is as below:-
> 
> Note: - Below code sniff is taken from latest LTP August month
> release.
> 
> run_stress()
> {
>         do_mount;
> 
>         for i in $(seq 0 $(($1-1)))
>         do
>                 mkdir /dev/memcg/$i 2> /dev/null
>                 ./memcg_process_stress $2 $3 &
>                 eval pid$i=$!
> 
>                 eval echo \$pid$i > /dev/memcg/$i/tasks
>         done
> 
>         for i in $(seq 0 $(($1-1)))
>         do
>                 eval /bin/kill -s SIGUSR1 \$pid$i 2> /dev/null
>         done
> 
>         sleep $4
> 
>         for i in $(seq 0 $(($1-1)))
>         do
>                 eval /bin/kill -s SIGINT \$pid$i 2> /dev/null
> <----send  SIGINT signal for a pid 
>                 eval wait \$pid$i
> 
>                 rmdir /dev/memcg/$i 2> /dev/null
>         done
> 
>         cleanup;
> }
> 
> 
> Basically, the test case is not doing a proper cleanup using SIGINT.It
> seems that the current test runs for much longer time than expected,
> thus affecting test performance. During this course of time, other
> dependent tests were also not proceeding further and system seemed to
> be in a process hang state. However we have found that SIGKILL does a
> better cleanup job compared to SIGINT, to overcome this situation.
> 
> So, I have created a patch to fix above test case issue. Kindly review
> this patch and acknowledge. I think this patch can be merged into
> latest LTP code to avoid this problem. 
> 
> Please let me know if you need any clarifications.
> 
> Regards,
> Shubham
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:
> 
> Show off your parallel programming skills.
> Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
> _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
and start using them to simplify application deployment and
accelerate your shift to cloud computing.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list