From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F46C433EF for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:57:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C731261078 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:57:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org C731261078 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.linux.it Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAA373C091D for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 11:57:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 579E33C091D for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 11:57:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 241F2600658 for ; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 11:57:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CF7A1FD6C; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:57:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1636541824; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A0WdlGixWTyr/zhefGUPWyC1QvkagaZe0QcAcj0sYks=; b=EwpU3WZeGM+k3wQt/RJNgfKcAzO5mju8VIRk/reu+BhxkJVtSooiZ7bq4+YlFsiN7i5xsu F79rixbL2QFdEJc+90fJFMmOKi1SN0MJ2uEQ7xvl9+uxr1/o9zlPJX6GQ3EjzdEgWpqxCF XdJ+Jwy2HmceyG2JTgcJ+MkSTFiRjYo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1636541824; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=A0WdlGixWTyr/zhefGUPWyC1QvkagaZe0QcAcj0sYks=; b=HzpCIBdat4QESHVRsz4o4qUrL3JGBdws9FoloAYu3FUPNyusrDKeXJhrxu7tut/agmHxz1 6SAhQLGZP8ucFjDA== Received: from g78 (unknown [10.163.24.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3997A3B8C; Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:57:03 +0000 (UTC) References: <20190508084447.18191-1-liwang@redhat.com> <20190509071605.GB6096@dhcp-9-109-247-167.in.ibm.com> <20190509091911.GA8751@dhcp-9-109-247-167.in.ibm.com> <20190514150619.GA4394@rei.lan> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.9; emacs 27.2 From: Richard Palethorpe To: Cyril Hrubis Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 10:54:51 +0000 In-reply-to: <20190514150619.GA4394@rei.lan> Message-ID: <878rxwqnwg.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] numa: fix numa test error with non-continuous nodes X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: rpalethorpe@suse.de Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hello, Cyril Hrubis writes: > Hi! >> > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/numa/numa01.sh >> > b/testcases/kernel/numa/numa01.sh >> > index 33393ac8d..47c18edd6 100755 >> > --- a/testcases/kernel/numa/numa01.sh >> > +++ b/testcases/kernel/numa/numa01.sh >> > @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ setup() >> > test1() >> > { >> > Mem_curr=0 >> > + node_index=0 >> > >> > for node in $nodes_list; do >> > numactl --cpunodebind=$node --membind=$node support_numa >> > alloc_1MB & >> > @@ -101,7 +102,8 @@ test1() >> > >> > TST_RETRY_FUNC "check_for_support_numa $pid" 0 >> > >> > - Mem_curr=$(echo "$(extract_numastat_p $pid $node) * $MB" >> > |bc) >> > + Mem_curr=$(echo "$(extract_numastat_p $pid $node_index) * >> > $MB" |bc) >> > + let node_index++ >> > >> >> I guess it can be work, but the disadvantage of that is we have to involve >> a new variable(node_index) in each of the tests (from test1 to test10). >> Hence I don't think it is much better than my patch. For which way to go, >> I'd leave this to Cyril to make a choice. Or, maybe he has different >> thoughts on this:). > > I actually do not care that much about the numa01.sh tests, because > these are broken in more ways than this and were never correct to begin > with. > > I've started to rewrite these into proper tests, the set_mempolicy() was > first part of that effort, the mbind() tests are continuation of that > and the end goal is to get rid of these broken tests eventually. We have quite a few mbind and set_mempolicy tests now. So should we delete this test? > > -- > Cyril Hrubis > chrubis@suse.cz -- Thank you, Richard. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp