From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sfi-mx-3.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.28.123] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NxEVf-0004Oi-CM for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 07:08:11 +0000 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]) by sfi-mx-3.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) id 1NxEVd-0002dZ-9e for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 01 Apr 2010 07:08:11 +0000 Received: from d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.228]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o3171AU5002672 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:01:10 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o31782Us098362 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:08:02 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o31781Ol008046 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:08:02 -0600 Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:37:58 +0530 From: Rishikesh K Rajak Message-ID: <20100401070758.GB13796@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20100331045334.GA3878@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LTP] Fcntl16 test case 2 failure List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Anthony Ton Cc: "ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net" On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:39:31PM -0400, Anthony Ton wrote: > I Rishikesh, > My mistake, both of them fail. But one with error code 5 (runltp), while fcntl16 run by itself with error code 37. > Regards, > Anthony > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony Ton > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 7:33 PM > To: 'Rishikesh K Rajak' > Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: RE: [LTP] Fcntl16 test case 2 failure > > Hi Rishikesh, > I am running against kernel 2.6.27.18. Gave a try on 2.6.27 kernel and i did not get any failure in both way as you tried. :/opt/ltp/testcases/bin # ./fcntl16 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 1 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 1: without manadatory locking PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 1 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 2 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 2: with mandatory record locking PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 2 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 3 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 3: mandatory locking with NODELAY PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 3 :/opt/ltp/testcases/bin # ./fcntl16_64 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 1 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 1: without manadatory locking PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 1 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 2 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 2: with mandatory record locking PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 2 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 3 fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 3: mandatory locking with NODELAY PASSED fcntl16 0 TINFO : Exiting block 3 :/opt/ltp/testcases/bin # uname -a Linux xxx 2.6.27.19-5-default #1 SMP 2009-02-28 04:40:21 +0100 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux :/opt/ltp/testcases/bin # -Rishi > I observe that if I running the test suite using runltp, then fcntl16 passes the test. However, if I run fcntl16 by itself, I get the TFAIL as mentioned in previous email. Do you know why the results are different if running fcntl16 from runltp vs. runing fcntl16 by itself? > Thanks, > Anthony > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rishikesh K Rajak [mailto:risrajak@linux.vnet.ibm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:54 PM > To: Anthony Ton > Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [LTP] Fcntl16 test case 2 failure > > > Hi Anthony, > > >Hi LTP Team, > >I run test case fcntl16 and get a failure on test case 2 with messages > >below > > I have tested with latest kernel 2.6.32 and i could not face this problem. > > Can you let us know about your setup little bit more ? > > > > >fcntl16 0 TINFO : Entering block 2 > >fcntl16 1 TFAIL : First parent lock failed > >fcntl16 2 TFAIL : Test case 1, errno = 37 > >fcntl16 0 TINFO : Test case 2: with mandatory record locking FAILED > > > >>I look into the code and think that it is trying to do a lock on the > >>entire file > >with write lock using option F_WRLCK, 0, 0L, 0L, IGNORED. Is it > >correct? Can someone > >+elaborate a little more? What does the errno = 37 mean? > > This errno means you are not having any lock available while doing operation with fcntl, with F_SETLK . > > asm-generic/errno.h:#define ENOLCK 37 /* No record locks > available */ > > -- > Thanks & Regards > Rishi > LTP Maintainer > IBM, LTC, Bangalore > Please join IRC #ltp @ irc.freenode.net -- Thanks & Regards Rishi LTP Maintainer IBM, LTC, Bangalore Please join IRC #ltp @ irc.freenode.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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