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

[Shubham <shubham@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

  Thanks Subrata,
                            I will take care of below mentioned points 
in future.

Regards
--Shubham

On Tuesday 14 September 2010 11:31 AM, Subrata Modak wrote:
> 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