On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:09:58PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
> Andrew Jones writes:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:32:00PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
> > > Alexandru Elisei writes:
> > Ah, I think I understand now. Were you running 32-bit arm tests? If so,
> > it'd be good to point that out
Andrew Jones writes:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:32:00PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
Alexandru Elisei writes:
Ah, I think I understand now. Were you running 32-bit arm tests? If so,
it'd be good to point that out explicitly in the commit message (the
'arm:' prefix in the summary is ambiguous).
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:32:00PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
> Alexandru Elisei writes:
>
> > Though I'm not sure how you managed to get MAX_SMP to go down to 6 cores
> > on
> > a 12 core machine. MAX_SMP is initialized to $(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN),
> > so the body of the loop should never
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 06:52:50PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
> This loop logic is broken for machines with a number of CPUs that
> isn't a power of two. A machine with 8 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=8
> but a machine with 12 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=6 because 12 >> 2 ==
Alexandru Elisei writes:
Though I'm not sure how you managed to get MAX_SMP to go down to 6 cores
on
a 12 core machine. MAX_SMP is initialized to $(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN),
so the body of the loop should never execute. I also tried it on a 6 core
machine, and MAX_SMP was 6, not 3.
Am I
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 06:52:50PM +, Colton Lewis wrote:
> This loop logic is broken for machines with a number of CPUs that
> isn't a power of two. A machine with 8 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=8
> but a machine with 12 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=6 because 12 >> 2 ==
> 6. This can, in
This loop logic is broken for machines with a number of CPUs that
isn't a power of two. A machine with 8 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=8
but a machine with 12 CPUs will test with MAX_SMP=6 because 12 >> 2 ==
6. This can, in rare circumstances, lead to different test results
depending only on the
