From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4FF5A79E.9030703@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 10:41:34 -0400 From: Prarit Bhargava MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Stultz CC: Linux Kernel , stable@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux@openhuawei.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3][RFC] Fix for leapsecond caused futex issue (v4) References: <1341382890-42324-1-git-send-email-johnstul@us.ibm.com> <4FF3E178.7000806@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FF3E178.7000806@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/04/2012 02:23 AM, John Stultz wrote: > On 07/03/2012 11:21 PM, John Stultz wrote: >> Ok, made a few tweaks to address issues caught by Prarit's and my >> testing. This has run for a number of hours now w/ my leap-a-day.c >> test on a few machines. >> >> I'd really appreciate any extra testing, review, or acks at this point. >> I'm targeting mid-late Thursday (to give folks in the US a chance to >> review & test) as a point when I'll submit this upstream if no other >> issues are found. > > And again, here's my leap-a-day.c test case which can be used to trigger a > leapsecond every day, or every ~13 seconds via the -s option. > I tested this patchset for ~22 hours without any issues using my own leap second test code, John's previous leaptest.c and this new leap-a-day test with and without the -s option. In all x86 systems' cases (both AMD and Intel, large cpu count[1] and small cpu count) I also ran Firefox in the background and monitored it using top and occasionally breaking in to check the status of the futexes. I haven't seen anything wrong with any of the systems. John, my apologies for not getting to exactly 24 hours. I've usurped these systems long enough and other people need them :/. I'm going to continue to run two systems (one AMD and one Intel) for a longer stretch but I don't anticipate any issues at this point. So ... Acked-by: Prarit Bhargava For the entire patchset. P.