On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 01:52:40PM +0800, Bian Naimeng wrote: > > > CAI Qian wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> 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", > >> 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. > > What happened if you run the tests for a recent upstream kernel? There > > are some patches for ksm recently merged upstream. If the problem still > > persistent, please paste the EXACT OUTPUT from the ksm01 test. If it is > > hung, please upload sysrq-t output somewhere. > > > > Maybe there are some bugs in the RHEL6's kernel, but the purpose of this patch > is not to workround these bugs, i want to fix the test's bug. > > Would you explain to me why we do this loop "while (new_num < old_num * 3)" in > group_check, i think "while (new_num < old_num + 3)" is better. > > Some time ago, the following patch insert this loop. > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=AANLkTi%3Dg%3DojJu0m%2B556rnekYenRTXtX%2BVBOj%3DrPmnjSw%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=ltp-list > > The changelog of this patch said "we should wait 3~5 increments of the > /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/full_scans before checking ksm* testcases's results", but > it do "while (new_num < old_num * 3)" actually. I made a mistake. The code is what I wanted to do, but the changelog was wrong. When testing the new ksm patch, the developer told us we must wait 3~5 times increments of the number before checking testing results. So I coded to wait til new_num >= old_num * 3 before checking the results.
About 'echo 2 > /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/run' problem, I have tested it with ksm01. If I run the 'echo 2 > /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/run' before issue ksm test, the content of /sys/kernel/mm/ksm/run will be changed to 1 and the test can finished successfully. Only if I echo the 2 between the testing process, ksm01 will hang up. On that time, new_num will be zero, so your plus 3 method won't work either. So what should we do in this circumstance? Thanks. Han Pingtian > > Regards > Bian > > > CAI Qian > > > >>>> 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 -- Han Pingtian Quality Engineer hpt @ #kernel-qe Red Hat, Inc Freedom ... courage ... Commitment ... ACCOUNTABILITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
