From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Edward Liaw <edliaw@google.com>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] sched/starvation: Choose from available cpus
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 09:40:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240606074059.GA463883@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240606014022.1425928-1-edliaw@google.com>
Hi Edward, Wei,
> Use the first available cpu in the sched_getaffinity set.
> This test was failing as a 32bit test for some arm architectures where
> cpu 0 does not support 32bit applications.
> Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Edward Liaw <edliaw@google.com>
> ---
> .../kernel/sched/cfs-scheduler/starvation.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/sched/cfs-scheduler/starvation.c b/testcases/kernel/sched/cfs-scheduler/starvation.c
> index eb9fd6ff5..0fd45e281 100644
> --- a/testcases/kernel/sched/cfs-scheduler/starvation.c
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/sched/cfs-scheduler/starvation.c
> @@ -49,12 +49,27 @@ again:
> static void setup(void)
> {
> cpu_set_t mask;
> + int cpu = 0;
> + long ncpus = tst_ncpus_conf();
> CPU_ZERO(&mask);
> - CPU_SET(0, &mask);
> + /* Restrict test to a single cpu */
> + TST_EXP_PASS(sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask));
> - TST_EXP_POSITIVE(sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask));
Yeah, Wei was correct that both sched_getaffinity() and sched_setaffinity()
should use TST_EXP_PASS() because return only 0 on success (non-zero value is in
the mask, thus using TST_EXP_POSITIVE() was wrong. Ideally this would be in a
separate commit (before your changes), but I'm ok just to note it in the commit
message.
I was also thinking why test macros are used in setup() function (completely
unrelated to the change), I would just use plain code:
if (!sched_getaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask))
tst_brk(TBROK | TERRNO, "sched_getaffinity() failed");
> + if (CPU_COUNT(&mask) == 0)
> + tst_brk(TBROK, "No cpus available");
I was thinking a while and looking in other software which uses CPU_COUNT().
And agree this should be probably tst_brk(TBROK)
Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
Kind regards,
Petr
> +
> + while (CPU_ISSET(cpu, &mask) == 0 && cpu < ncpus)
> + cpu++;
> +
> + CPU_ZERO(&mask);
> +
> + CPU_SET(cpu, &mask);
> +
> + TST_EXP_PASS(sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask));
> +
> + tst_res(TINFO, "Set affinity to CPU %d", cpu);
> if (tst_parse_long(str_loop, &loop, 1, LONG_MAX))
> tst_brk(TBROK, "Invalid number of loop number '%s'", str_loop);
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-06 7:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-06 1:40 [LTP] [PATCH v2] sched/starvation: Choose from available cpus Edward Liaw via ltp
2024-06-06 7:40 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240606074059.GA463883@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=edliaw@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox