Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 05:59:20PM -0500, William Harrington wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 21:08:16 +0100
Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:
FAIL: rt/tst-mqueue5
Comparing my i3 build (LFS as at 1st September) I only saw
proteccted1{a,b} and getaddrinfo{4,5} - I suspect all of the others
are because I'm using AMD (yeah, I'm paranoid :) The
double-vlen{2,4} do not ring any bells, but I think I've seen
-double and -idouble on my other AMD box.
As with all tests - they probably mean nothing on their own ;)
ĸen
Message queuing is tested and the output is at rt/tst-mqueue5.out
The test is time sensitive and may fail while using the system or the system is
slow.
Thanks. In my case, the host system was running X with 3 or 4 terms
(urxvt) open, and probably running xscreensaver during the tests.
The box had probably throttled back to its lowest cpufreq. ISTR
that my AMD boxes drop to lower frequencies than my i3, and probably
do less per Hz.
I can understand the screensaver using cycles, but if it's running the
tests, it's curious why the cpu would slow down.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
