Bian Naimeng wrote: > > Qian Cai wrote: >> On 2011-4-4, at 0:47, Bian Naimeng <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> There are some problem in ksm tests. >>> >>> 1. We should break the test when checking is failure. >> No, this is not the intention. The design here is to run all tests to check >> for all stats to give a full picture even if the a single failure has been >> observed. This type of the failures do not prevent the rest of the tests >> from running, so there is no need to stop the tests now which also give more >> insight to track down root causes. > > Various reason can make checking failure, someone can make the test hangup. > I did this test on RHEL5, i found ksmd stopped before doing "echo 2 > > /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/run",
Sorry， it's RHEL6. Regards Bian > so group_check will be hanged on "new_num < old_num * 3". > > So, i think we should break the test if "run" is not expecting. > >>> 2. The condition "new_num < old_num * 3" seems uncomfortable, i think >>> it should be "new_num < old_num + 3" >> I don't understand. What error did you see from the testing output? > > Sometimes, the old_num is a big number, so it takes long time in this loop, > i don't understand the purpose. > Would you explain to me why we expect this condition "new_num < old_num * 3". > >>> 3. After stopping ksm(echo 2 > /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/run), the ksmd >>> will stop scaning pages, so looping in "new_num < old_num * 3" >>> is wrong. >> Ditto. >> > > After stopping ksm, looping in "new_num < old_num * 3" will make the process > hang up, > because new_num does not be increased. > > Regards > Bian > > >> CAI Qian >>> Signed-off-by: Bian Naimeng <[email protected]> >>> >>> --- >>> testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- >>> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 19 ++++++++++--------- >>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h >>> b/testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h >>> index 778d403..b640a63 100644 >>> --- a/testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h >>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h >>> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ void check(char *path, long int value); >>> void verify(char value, int proc, int start, int end, int start2, int end2); >>> void group_check(int run, int pages_shared, int pages_sharing, >>> int pages_volatile, int pages_unshared, int sleep_millisecs, >>> - int pages_to_scan); >>> + int pages_to_scan, int scans); >>> void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit); >>> void check_ksm_options(int *size, int *num, int *unit); >>> void write_cpusets(void); >>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c >>> index 12e61e9..db1a7dd 100644 >>> --- a/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c >>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c >>> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ void check(char *path, long int value) >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "%s is %ld.", path, atol(buf)); >>> if (atol(buf) != value) >>> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s is not %ld.", path, value); >>> + tst_brkm(TFAIL, tst_exit, "%s is not %ld.", path, value); >>> } >>> >>> void verify(char value, int proc, int start, int end, int start2, int end2) >>> @@ -312,7 +312,8 @@ void verify(char value, int proc, int start, int end, >>> int start2, int end2) >>> >>> void group_check(int run, int pages_shared, int pages_sharing, >>> int pages_volatile, int pages_unshared, >>> - int sleep_millisecs, int pages_to_scan) >>> + int sleep_millisecs, int pages_to_scan, >>> + int scans) >>> { >>> int fd; >>> char buf[BUFSIZ]; >>> @@ -332,7 +333,7 @@ void group_check(int run, int pages_shared, int >>> pages_sharing, >>> old_num = new_num = atoi(buf); >>> if (lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET) == -1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "lseek"); >>> - while (new_num < old_num * 3) { >>> + while (new_num < old_num + scans) { >>> sleep(1); >>> if (read(fd, buf, BUFSIZ) < 0) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "read"); >>> @@ -587,7 +588,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> if (kill(child[k], SIGCONT) == -1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "kill child[%d]", k); >>> } >>> - group_check(1, 2, size * num * 256 - 2, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(1, 2, size * num * 256 - 2, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num, 3); >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "wait for child 1 to stop."); >>> if (waitpid(child[1], &status, WUNTRACED) == -1) >>> @@ -599,7 +600,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "resume child 1."); >>> if (kill(child[1], SIGCONT) == -1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "kill"); >>> - group_check(1, 3, size * num * 256 - 3, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(1, 3, size * num * 256 - 3, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num, 3); >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "wait for child 1 to stop."); >>> if (waitpid(child[1], &status, WUNTRACED) == -1) >>> @@ -613,7 +614,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> if (kill(child[k], SIGCONT) == -1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "kill child[%d]", k); >>> } >>> - group_check(1, 1, size * num * 256 - 1, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(1, 1, size * num * 256 - 1, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num, 3); >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "wait for all children to stop."); >>> for (k = 0; k < num; k++) { >>> @@ -627,7 +628,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "resume child 1."); >>> if (kill(child[1], SIGCONT) == -1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "kill"); >>> - group_check(1, 1, size * num * 256 - 2, 0, 1, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(1, 1, size * num * 256 - 2, 0, 1, 0, size * 256 * num, 3); >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "wait for child 1 to stop."); >>> if (waitpid(child[1], &status, WUNTRACED) == -1) >>> @@ -647,7 +648,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "open"); >>> if (write(fd, "2", 1) != 1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "write"); >>> - group_check(2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num, 0); >>> >>> tst_resm(TINFO, "wait for all children to stop."); >>> for (k = 0; k < num; k++) { >>> @@ -668,7 +669,7 @@ void create_same_memory(int size, int num, int unit) >>> if (write(fd, "0", 1) != 1) >>> tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup, "write"); >>> close(fd); >>> - group_check(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num); >>> + group_check(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, size * 256 * num, 0); >>> while (waitpid(-1, &status, WUNTRACED | WCONTINUED) > 0) >>> if (WEXITSTATUS(status) != 0) >>> tst_resm(TFAIL, "child exit status is %d", >>> -- >>> 1.7.1 >>> >>> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Xperia(TM) PLAY > It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming > smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. > And it wants your games. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
