Hi,

I want to suggest a patch for hugetlb tests.

There are "-c" options in this "${LTPROOT}/runtest/hugetlb" file:
------------
hugeshmat01 hugeshmat01 -i 5
hugeshmat02 hugeshmat02 -i 5
hugeshmat03 hugeshmat03 -i 5

hugeshmctl01 hugeshmctl01 -i 5 -c 3
hugeshmctl02 hugeshmctl02 -i 5 -c 3
hugeshmctl03 hugeshmctl03 -i 5 -c 3

hugeshmdt01 hugeshmdt01 -I 5 -c10

hugeshmget01 hugeshmget01 -c 10 -i 10
hugeshmget02 hugeshmget02 -c 10 -i 10
hugeshmget03 hugeshmget03 -c 10 -i 10
hugeshmget05 hugeshmget05 -c 10 -i 10

------------

But I think that these "-c" options have not important meanings.
I think that the test for several times may not be necessary.
For example, the purpose of "hugeshmget02" is the error case test of 
shmget(). In this case, if the expected failure occurred once, it is 
enough, and the repetition of test is unnecessary anymore, I think.
And, depending on a case, there may be a system without enough memory 
for these repetition tests.
Therefore I want to suggest reducing the "-c" option.

I got an answer that these "hugetlb" tests were not complete test programs.
--> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg10171.html
Therefore, this revision is a temporary.


Signed-off-by: Tomonori Mitani <[email protected]>

============
--- a/runtest/hugetlb   2010-06-14 21:29:09.000000000 +0900
+++ b/runtest/hugetlb   2010-06-30 09:32:01.000000000 +0900
@@ -7,14 +7,14 @@
 hugeshmat02 hugeshmat02 -i 5
 hugeshmat03 hugeshmat03 -i 5
 
-hugeshmctl01 hugeshmctl01 -i 5 -c 3
-hugeshmctl02 hugeshmctl02 -i 5 -c 3
-hugeshmctl03 hugeshmctl03 -i 5 -c 3
+hugeshmctl01 hugeshmctl01 -i 5
+hugeshmctl02 hugeshmctl02 -i 5
+hugeshmctl03 hugeshmctl03 -i 5
 
-hugeshmdt01 hugeshmdt01 -I 5 -c10
+hugeshmdt01 hugeshmdt01 -I 5
 
-hugeshmget01 hugeshmget01 -c 10 -i 10
-hugeshmget02 hugeshmget02 -c 10 -i 10
-hugeshmget03 hugeshmget03 -c 10 -i 10
-hugeshmget05 hugeshmget05 -c 10 -i 10
+hugeshmget01 hugeshmget01 -i 10
+hugeshmget02 hugeshmget02 -i 10
+hugeshmget03 hugeshmget03 -i 10
+hugeshmget05 hugeshmget05 -i 10
 
--- a/testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugeshmget/hugeshmget01.c    2010-06-14
21:29:09.000000000 +0900
+++ b/testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugeshmget/hugeshmget01.c    2010-06-30
09:12:00.000000000 +0900
@@ -78,14 +78,14 @@
                tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, "OPTION PARSING ERROR - %s", msg);
        }
 
-       setup();                        /* global setup */
-
        /* The following loop checks looping state if -i option given */
         if ( get_no_of_hugepages() <= 0 || hugepages_size() <= 0 )
              tst_brkm(TCONF, cleanup, "Not enough available Hugepages");
         else             
               huge_pages_shm_to_be_allocated = ( get_no_of_hugepages() *
hugepages_size() * 1024) / 2 ;
         
+       setup();                        /* global setup */
+
         for (lc = 0; TEST_LOOPING(lc); lc++) {
                /* reset Tst_count in case we are looping */
                Tst_count = 0;
============



Regards--

-Tomonori Mitani

Attachment: hugetlb.patch
Description: Binary data

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to