On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 03:42:50PM -0500, Sonny Rao wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 02:08:30PM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 14:57 -0500, Sonny Rao wrote:
> > > (Apologies if this is a re-post)
> > >
> > > Hi, I was running 2.6.19 and running some benchmarks using
> > > libhugetlbfs (1.0.1) and I can fairly reliably trigger this bug:
> >
> > Is this triggered by a libhugetlbfs test case? If so, which one?
>
> Ok so the testsuite all passed except for "slbpacaflush" which said
> "PASS (inconclusive)" ... not sure if that is expected or not.
I used "PASS (inconclusive)" to mean: you're probably ok, but the bug
in question is non-deterministically triggered, so maybe we just got
lucky.
This testcase attempts to trigger a bunch of times (50?), but the
conditions are sufficiently dicey that a false PASS is still a
realistic possibility (I've seen it happen, but not often). Some
other tests (e.g. alloc-instantiate-race) are technically
non-deterministic too, but I've managed to device trigger conditions
which are reliable in practice, those tests report plain PASS.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Libhugetlbfs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libhugetlbfs-devel
