Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Add ftrace-stress-test to LTP

Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Li Zefan wrote: >> Subrata Modak wrote: >>> Thanks. I need to test this on a suitable kernel. But doubtful if i can >>> add in the default run. >>> >> Why? Because it costs 90 secs? This is configurable, and some other >> test suites like cp

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Add ftrace-stress-test to LTP

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Li Zefan wrote: > Subrata Modak wrote: >> Thanks. I need to test this on a suitable kernel. But doubtful if i can >> add in the default run. >> > > Why? Because it costs 90 secs? This is configurable, and some other > test suites like cpuctl cost more time. > > If

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Add ftrace-stress-test to LTP

Subrata Modak wrote: > Thanks. I need to test this on a suitable kernel. But doubtful if i can > add in the default run. > Why? Because it costs 90 secs? This is configurable, and some other test suites like cpuctl cost more time. If a test suite is not run by default, I guess people won't know

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] Add ftrace-stress-test to LTP

Thanks. I need to test this on a suitable kernel. But doubtful if i can add in the default run. Regards-- Subrata On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:06 +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > We test ftrace by forking processes to simultaneously and > constantly read/write different tracing files in debugfs > and procfs

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] ltp setrlimit testcase patch for RLIMIT_FSIZE resource

Ok. Merged. Regards-- Subrata On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 08:52 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Subrata Modak > wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 17:05 +0530, Harsh Prateek Bora wrote: > >> Current testcase for setrlimit resource RLIMIT_FSIZE > >> is using a global inte

Re: [LTP] Rt_sigprocmask01 test case caused "segment fault" on x86

On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 13:22 +0200, Fu, Yingang wrote: > hi, Garrett > > This is a similar problem as rt_sigsuspend01 which has been fix > before. > > Failed log: > > r...@congatec:/opt/ltp-full> ./testcases/bin/rt_sigprocmask01 > Segmentation fault > > After apply the patch: > r...@congatec:

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix tst_unzip_file.zip permissions

On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 12:26 +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > Hi! > When creating package, the buildsysem freaks out on file > tst_unzip_file.zip because it has world writeable permission, however > this is not necessary for the test itself to work. Patch attached. > > Signed-off-by: Cyril Hrubis chru

Re: [LTP] pidns31: fix EACCESS error in mq_open()

On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 16:01 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Subrata Modak > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 18:43 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > >> Garrett Cooper [yaneg...@gmail.com] wrote: > >> | On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu > >>

Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fix two "2-1.c" tests of POSIX

>The tests need to be written to use only POSIX compliant APIs. >defining any _XXX_SOURCE after including any C library headers is pointless... My means was not good. This test-set is just for POSIX. But, if "_GNU_SOURCE" is defined, unnecessary GNU function irrelevant to POSIX becomes effect

Re: [LTP] New LTP test for CAN packet flow

Thanks very much. Not sure why it did not reach the actual LTP mailing list :-( Regards-- Subrata On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > Dear Subrata, > > long time - no update ;-) > > But now i created a test that's able to detect a corrupt CAN frame flow > inside > the Kern

Re: [LTP] Help...

Here is some description about syscall testcases - http://ltp.sourceforge.net/archive/old_pages/coverage/temp/descriptions. html - Kiran From: ARJIT SHARMA [mailto:joyar...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 11:47 AM To: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; ltp-list-requ...@l