That's the reason. Try to install a newer version of ubuntu (e.g. ubuntu
11.10, 12.04) so that you can test the oom_control functionality.

Probably we should disable these tests if oom_control is not available. But
seems that gtest does not provide a clean way to do this (dynamically
disable a test).

We can add another PREFIX to those test cases (like ROOT_CGROUP), but that
seems to be tedious.

Also, the break of these tests indicates a good thing: we do require
oom_control capability in cgroups isolation module. If they cannot pass the
unit test, they should not use the cgroups module.

- Jie

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Benjamin Mahler <[email protected]>wrote:

> $ uname -a
> Linux ubuntu 2.6.32-38-generic #83-Ubuntu SMP Wed Jan 4 11:12:07 UTC 2012
> x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Jie Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Sept. 28, 2012, 7:16 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
>> > > I've patched this in and I'm seeing a a failing test:
>> > >
>> > > [ RUN      ] CgroupsTest.ROOT_CGROUPS_ListenEvent
>> > > ../../src/tests/cgroups_tests.cpp:365: Failure
>> > > Value of: cgroups::writeControl(hierarchy, "/prof",
>> "memory.oom_control", "1").isSome()
>> > >   Actual: false
>> > > Expected: true
>> > > [  FAILED  ] CgroupsTest.ROOT_CGROUPS_ListenEvent (290 ms)
>>
>> What's your kernel version? Please do a 'uname -a'.
>>
>> We saw this before, the reason is you are using an old kernel which does
>> not have oom_control capability.
>>
>>
>> - Jie
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
>> https://reviews.apache.org/r/7338/#review12031
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> On Sept. 28, 2012, 5:33 a.m., Jie Yu wrote:
>> >
>> > -----------------------------------------------------------
>> > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/7338/
>> > -----------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > (Updated Sept. 28, 2012, 5:33 a.m.)
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Review request for mesos and Benjamin Hindman.
>> >
>> >
>> > Description
>> > -------
>>
>> >
>> > The recent refactor changes break the assumptions in the cgroups code.
>> >
>> >
>> > Diffs
>> > -----
>> >
>> >   src/linux/cgroups.cpp cdafe6e
>> >   third_party/libprocess/include/stout/os.hpp 13dbc71
>> >
>> > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/7338/diff/
>> >
>> >
>> > Testing
>> > -------
>> >
>> > make check.
>> >
>> > Tested on my vm (latest ubuntu 12.04)
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Jie Yu
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to