On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 11:27 +0530, Vijay Kumar wrote: > Subrata Modak wrote: > > Hi Suzuki, > > > > Can you kindly review Vijay´s design and explore ways to collaborate on > > this. > [clip] > >> 2) Vijay can go ahead in writing those tests that he has proposed. You > >> can review his patches then, > > I have implemented 3 test cases. I thought I would post them up, to > get review comments. I am continuing with implementing rest of the cases > as well. > > I have tested them on x86_64 system with 2 fake NUMA nodes. > > The patch will probably break builds in systems that do not have libnuma.
Yes, it introduces build breaks because of want of libnuma. I encountered it on my machine: 2.6.18-53.1.13.el5, i386 BUILD=Error, Error Message: cc -Wall -I../../include -g -Wall -I../../../../include -Wall -c -o move_pages_support.o move_pages_support.c move_pages_support.c:5:18: error: numa.h: No such file or directory move_pages_support.c: In function ‘free_pages’: move_pages_support.c:29: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_free’ move_pages_support.c: In function ‘alloc_pages_on_nodes’: move_pages_support.c:59: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_alloc_onnode’ move_pages_support.c:59: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast move_pages_support.c: In function ‘alloc_pages_linear’: move_pages_support.c:102: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_max_node’ move_pages_support.c: In function ‘alloc_shared_pages_on_node’: move_pages_support.c:225: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_tonode_memory’ move_pages_support.c: In function ‘check_numa’: move_pages_support.c:265: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘numa_available’ > There is a script in testcases/kernel/numa/test.sh that checks if numa > support is available. Do we replicate it over here? I guess the best > approach would be to test for NUMA support in the toplevel Makefile and > pass the result to all other Makefiles. Don´t you think this will unnecessarily need other Makefiles to handle NUMA code check, even if they do not need it ? If it is like that a top level Makefile checks for libnuma and exports it, and, only those Makefile which deals with NUMA checks for this export variable, then it should be fine. Let us know how you would like to do this. Regards-- Subrata > > Vijay > > Index: ltp-stripped/testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile > =================================================================== > --- /dev/null 1970-01-01 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 > +++ ltp-stripped/testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile > 2008-06-15 19:19:20.000000000 +0530 > @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ > +# > +# Copyright (c) International Business Machines Corp., 2001 > +# > +# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > +# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by > +# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or > +# (at your option) any later version. > +# > +# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See > +# the GNU General Public License for more details. > +# > +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License > +# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software > +# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA > +# > + ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
