From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sfi-mx-1.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.28.121] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwYAs-0003Ac-Mz for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:55:54 +0000 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]) by sfi-mx-1.v28.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) id 1NwYAp-0001dy-Er for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:55:54 +0000 Received: from ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-mail03 [147.11.57.144]) by mail.windriver.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2U9tjZx012040 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 02:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BB1CB41.40805@windriver.com> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:58:25 +0800 From: "lina.zhao" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [LTP] about hugetlbfs 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: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net Hi all, I have some problem about hugetlbfs test. In hugeshmat01.c the attach address for shmat is 0x90000eee . But for mips32_Linux system ,the user pthread space is 0x00000000~0x7fffffff, so 0x90000eee exceed the space ,the test will always failed on mips_32. In hugemmap02.c #define LOW_ADDR2 (void *)(0x90000000) #define LOW_ADDR (void *)(0x80000000) addr = mmap(LOW_ADDR, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED | MAP_FIXED, nfildes, 0); addr2 = mmap(LOW_ADDR2, MAP_SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fildes, 0); /* 32-bit process */ if (addr2 > 0){ tst_resm(TCONF, "huge mmap() failed to test the scenario"); continue; } else if (addr == 0) { tst_resm(TPASS, "huge mmap() succeeded for 32-bit"); } else { tst_resm(TFAIL, "huge mmap() unexpectedly failed %s for 32-bit, errno=%d : %s", TEMPFILE, errno, strerror(errno)); } the 0x90000000 and 0x80000000 also exceed mips32 user pthread space , so I changed them . but add2 always return 717225984, no matter what I allocate to LOW_ADDR2. at last ,I changed LOW_ADDR2 to NULL, it also returned 717225984. in the function ,why addr2> 0 then error happens? why addr should be 0? it is what exactly the LOW_ADDR assigns. Thanks and Best Regards, Lina ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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