On 04/02/2020 10:34, Kamil Dudka wrote:
On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 1:45:06 AM CET Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 30/01/2020 13:53, Kamil Dudka wrote:
tests/cp/proc-short-read.sh expects that a pair of subsequent reads from
/proc/kallsyms will always return the same content. This does not seem to
be a safe assumption any more. The test has started to fail in our build
environment. I am not sure how to fix the test. We could probably make
it use another file from /proc but most of them are much smaller than
kallsyms and/or suffer from the same problem. Output of the failing test
follows.
Kamil
FAIL: tests/cp/proc-short-read
==============================
+ compare_ 1 2
+ diff -u 1 2
--- 1 2020-01-29 12:04:36.923963121 +0000
+++ 2 2020-01-29 12:04:37.026963484 +0000
@@ -114819,81 +114819,132 @@
0000000000000000 t nfs_file_direct_read.cold [nfs]
0000000000000000 t nfs_file_direct_write.cold [nfs]
0000000000000000 r .LC0 [nfs]
-0000000000000000 r .LC2 [nfs]
-0000000000000000 r __ksymtab_nfs_pgio_current_mirror [nfs]
-0000000000000000 r __kstrtab_nfs_pgio_current_mirror [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r __func__.87038 [nfs]
+0000000000000000 t __nfs_revalidate_inode.cold [nfs]
+0000000000000000 t nfs_revalidate_mapping.cold [nfs]
+0000000000000000 d nfs_net_ops [nfs]
+0000000000000000 t exit_nfs_fs [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r __param_enable_ino64 [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r __param_str_enable_ino64 [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r .LC15 [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r __ksymtab_nfs_fs_type [nfs]
+0000000000000000 r __kstrtab_nfs_fs_type [nfs]
+ fail=1
+ md5sum /proc/kallsyms
+ md5sum 2
+ sed 's/ .*//' 3
+ sed 's/ .*//' 4
+ compare sum.proc sum.2
+ compare_dev_null_ sum.proc sum.2
+ test 2 = 2
+ test xsum.proc = x/dev/null
+ test xsum.2 = x/dev/null
+ return 2
+ case $? in
+ compare_ sum.proc sum.2
+ diff -u sum.proc sum.2
--- sum.proc 2020-01-29 12:04:37.172963999 +0000
+++ sum.2 2020-01-29 12:04:37.175964009 +0000
@@ -1 +1 @@
-226cd09830f68c56edda0b9272be66e4
+37d7e78173b2a31d5f27cc66aa52e72a
+ fail=1
Interesting.
The attached changes to /proc/cpuinfo
which is a bit more awkward, but should be a valid test most of the time,
and is also the file for which the original bug report was against.
cheers,
Pádraig
Neither the content of /proc/cpuinfo is guaranteed to be immutable because
CPUs can go online/offline at run time. Anyway, the proposed patch has
passed my quick test. So I think it is an improvement over status quo.
pushed. marking done
cheers,
Pádraog