very clear thanks. 2010/10/13 Subrata Modak <[email protected]>: > On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 15:00 +0800, hake huang wrote: >> Hi Subrata, >> >> one question: >> -K will only record all kernel message, but can not match each testcase, >> right? > > It will record kernel messages for each individual test case by > recording it inside ltp*/output/<DMESG_DIR_NAME>/<testname>.dmeg > > Once test run is over it will delete all .dmeg* files of zero size and > will retain only those having real entries. So, you will get exactly > which tests generated kernel messages and what the messages exactly are > for each individual test. > > Regards-- > Subrata > >> >> Regards, >> >> Hake >> >> 2010/10/13 Subrata Modak <[email protected]>: >> > On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 12:22 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 13:30 +0800, hake huang wrote: >> >> > 2010/10/13 Garrett Cooper <[email protected]> >> >> > > >> >> > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 9:38 PM, hake huang <[email protected]> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > > Hi >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I see this simple solution is no quite fit. But the kernel dump >> >> > > > message for >> >> > > > each test case is necessary for analysing. I can work on this >> >> > > > further, with >> >> > > > below help: >> >> > > > 1. Where can I find the reason for the IIRC break? >> >> > > >> >> > > IIRC -> If I remember correctly. >> >> > so I need ask Subrata about this problem, right? what is the existing >> >> > functionality? >> >> >> >> I believe the functionality your original patch was proposing is already >> >> in LTP . I guess they will solve your problem. See the following >> >> commits: >> >> >> >> git show e3bc3758d3e4d17a0e04009ef873df53819b9ec6 >> >> git show bd9d440be1da8020c93ac92e497e3a16e66e9fa3 >> >> >> >> Just use: >> >> >> >> ./runltp -K <DMESG_DIRECTORY_NAME> >> > >> > Basically, its a choice given to users who would like to record the >> > kernel messages, and not forcing recording all kernel messages which >> > your original patch is proposing :-) >> > >> > Regards-- >> > Subrata >> > >> >> >> >> option while running ltp. >> >> >> >> Regards-- >> >> Subrata >> >> >> >> > > >> >> > > > 2. Can it be an option to avoid the size limitation on some >> >> > > > embedded >> >> > > > system? >> >> > > >> >> > > No. This is outside the realm of LTP, but we must remain conscious of >> >> > > the fact that there are folks running LTP on cellphones, etc, where >> >> > > space is very much a luxury. >> >> > I see. but why can't they run in quit_mode? >> >> > > >> >> > > > 3. A kind of seperating tag is needed for kernel message, right? >> >> > > > e.g >> >> > > > <kernel_dump_start>dump message<kernel_dump_end> >> >> > > >> >> > > I think that adding an optional capture feature might be worthwhile, >> >> > > but you'll no doubt quickly find with some processes that the dmesg >> >> > > buffer will fill up quickly. >> >> > I have seen such events, and such cases need to be checked manually. >> >> > > >> >> > > > 4. I see in ltp-pan.c the file descriptors, terminals are changed >> >> > > > in child >> >> > > > process. if the system(3) has problem, the worst cases is there are >> >> > > > no >> >> > > > kernel messge output in parent process, but the pan can still >> >> > > > function well. >> >> > > >> >> > > Can you say that with 100% certainty? One of the potential problems >> >> > > with system is the fact that it allocates a shell and depending on how >> >> > > processes are executed and how file descriptors are cleaned up, >> >> > > >> >> > > Actually, pan makes zero attempts at closing open file descriptors and >> >> > > the like, so the problem is still very much with pan. >> >> > > >> >> > So your concerns is about file descriptors which open in ltp process, >> >> > I think this is an existing problem. I mean maybe pan need to attempt >> >> > to close open file descriptors. system(3) only increases the change of >> >> > occurrence caused by this problem, right? >> >> > > > if not use system(3), can you give your suggestion on this, exec(3) >> >> > > > seems to >> >> > > > have the same problem as system(3)? >> >> > > >> >> > > Yes and no. In this case the problems that exist with open file >> >> > > descriptor inheritance, etc are unfortunately no worse from that >> >> > > perspective than your proposed code would do, but there are still >> >> > > other problems that need to be resolved with your proposed change >> >> > > anyhow that are much more pressing. >> >> > > >> >> > > -Garrett >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports >> >> standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. >> >> Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great >> >> experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. >> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Ltp-list mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list >> > >> > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
