On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 02:59 -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Jan 19, 2009, at 1:34, Subrata Modak <subr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 01:25 -0800, CAI Qian wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> --- On Fri, 1/16/09, Garrett Cooper <yaneg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> From: Garrett Cooper <yaneg...@gmail.com> > >>> Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] sched_cli_serv: client: connect > >>> failure, no = 111 v2 > >>> To: caiq...@cclom.cn > >>> Cc: ltp-l...@lists.sf.net > >>> Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 3:39 PM > >>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:25 PM, CAI Qian > >>> <caiq...@cclom.cn> wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> Sometimes, sched_cli_serv test case can still fail due > >>> to, > >>>> > >>>> client: connect failure, no = 111 > >>>> > >>>> This is because when the system is under load, the > >>> client may connect > >>>> before the server is ready. This patch fixes it by > >>> letting the server > >>>> run for 10 seconds first. It also disable shell > >>> command tracing by > >>>> default which was accidentally introduced by the last > >>> patch, > >>>> > >>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ltp/7149 > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: CAI Qian <caiq...@cclom.cn> > >>>> > >>>> --- > >>> ltp-full-20081031/testcases/kernel/sched/clisrv/ > >>> run_sched_cliserv.sh.orig > >>> 2009-01-16 11:12:49.821546689 +0800 > >>>> +++ > >>> ltp-full-20081031/testcases/kernel/sched/clisrv/run_sched_cliserv.sh > >>> 2009-01-16 11:13:18.935562956 +0800 > >>>> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ > >>>> -#!/bin/sh -x > >>>> +#!/bin/sh > >>>> > >>>> pthserv & > >>>> +sleep 10 > >>>> pthcli 127.0.0.1 $LTPROOT/testcases/bin/data > >>>> clientCode=$? > >>>> killall pthserv > >>> > >>> Sorry for interjecting, but I don't like hacks like > >>> this; there are > >>> some bad decisions like this that occur in my everyday > >>> work, and in > >>> order to make everything magically work the timeout keeps > >>> on growing, > >>> instead of the components working together with some level > >>> of > >>> cohesion. A better idea: make pthserv and pthcli more > >>> forgiving in > >>> terms of timeouts in their respective codebases, so that > >>> they're more > >>> robust when it comes to latency issues when connecting. > >>> > >>> Should be simple to implement -- add a counter and a loop / > >>> condition > >>> at the top of a loop to wait for the connection to occur or > >>> fail. > >>> > >>> If you want I'll write up the required changes in C. > >>> > >> > >> Yes, it is a hack indeed. The patch was to quickly workaround the > >> original false negative, and also make it reasonable robust. I am > >> happy > >> to test and review your version though. > > > > Garret, > > > > Would you be working on this ?? > > > > Regards-- > > Subrata > > > >> > >> CAI Qian > >> > >>> Cheers, > >>> -Garrett > >> > > I'd just go with the temporary workaround for now. I'll get to this in > due time.
Garrett, About this as well ? Regards-- Subrata > Thanks, > -Garrett ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Are you an open source citizen? Join us for the Open Source Bridge conference! Portland, OR, June 17-19. Two days of sessions, one day of unconference: $250. Need another reason to go? 24-hour hacker lounge. Register today! http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;215844324;13503038;v?http://opensourcebridge.org _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
