On Aug 10, 2009, at 10:40 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Subrata
> Modak wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:14 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at
On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:17 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Kumar
> Gala wrote:
>> I'm seeing this on fedora 11 on ppc64:
>>
>> make[3]: Leaving directory `/root/ltp/testcases/network/ipv6'
>> make[3]: Entering directory `/root
On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Ok. I have the time now so I'll install F11 amd64 and see what
>> happens. Something leads me to think that the build toolchain is
>> fubared, but that's just a hunch, as my copy of F10 (the last time I
>>
On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Kumar
> Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Lucio Correia wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kumar,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 13:33 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
I'm seeing this on fedora 11 on ppc64:
make[3]: Leaving directory `/root/ltp/testcases/network/ipv6'
make[3]: Entering directory `/root/ltp/testcases/network/lib6'
cc -Wall -I../../../include -g -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o runcc.o runcc.c
ar cr runcc.a runcc.o
runcc.a
make[3]: runcc.a: Command not foun
On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Lucio Correia wrote:
> Hi Kumar,
>
> On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 13:33 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> I get the following compile error:
>>
>> make[4]: Leaving directory `/root/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/
>> fstat'
>> make
On Aug 5, 2009, at 12:10 AM, Rishikesh wrote:
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Has anyone been able to build LTP on fedora 10 or 11.
>>
>> When I try on a x86_64 fedora 10 box:
>>
>> [ga...@komodo ltp]$ make autotools
>> aclocal -I m4
>> autoconf
>&
Has anyone been able to build LTP on fedora 10 or 11.
When I try on a x86_64 fedora 10 box:
[ga...@komodo ltp]$ make autotools
aclocal -I m4
autoconf
configure.ac:9: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_PROG_AR
If this token and others are legitimate, please use
m4_pattern_allow.
S
On Jul 29, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Kumar
> Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 29, 2009, at 1:55 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Kumar Gala>> >
>>> wrote:
>>&g
On Jul 29, 2009, at 1:55 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Kumar
> Gala wrote:
>> I get the following compile error:
>>
>> make[4]: Leaving directory `/root/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/
>> fstat'
>> make[4]: Entering direc
I get the following compile error:
make[4]: Leaving directory `/root/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fstat'
make[4]: Entering directory `/root/ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/
fstatat'
cc -Wall -I../../include -g -Wall -I../../../../include -Wall -
DTST_USE_NEWER64_SYSCALL=1 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
On Jul 22, 2009, at 11:32 AM, srikanth krishnakar wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Kumar Gala
> wrote:
>
> On Jul 22, 2009, at 10:38 AM, srikanth krishnakar wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Kumar Gala
> wrote:
> I'm
On Jul 22, 2009, at 10:38 AM, srikanth krishnakar wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Kumar Gala
> wrote:
> I'm not seeing any BUG* in traps.c @ line 904.
>
>
> On Jul 21, 2009, at 4:33 AM, srikanth krishnakar wrote:
>
> The LTP test case msg
I'm not seeing any BUG* in traps.c @ line 904.
On Jul 21, 2009, at 4:33 AM, srikanth krishnakar wrote:
> The LTP test case msgctl10.c fails on linux-2.6.29.6 for PowerPC
> architecture (ppc440)
>
>
> msgctl101 B[ cut here ]
> kernel BUG at arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.
On Dec 4, 2007, at 7:18 AM, Nate Straz wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 04:22:27PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Nov 30, 2007, at 12:03 PM, George Kraft wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 10:02 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>> I think CVS provides a barrie
On Nov 30, 2007, at 12:03 PM, George Kraft wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 10:02 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> I think CVS provides a barrier of entry for people that GIT reduces.
>> For example its a PITA for me to create diffs w/CVS because the speed
>> of CVS to the sf.net
So I brought this issue up in the past. And want to comment on it a
bit further.
1. If you haven't watch the talk Linus gave @ google related to git I
highly recommend watching it:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8
2. I'm mainly a kernel developer and I agree there is some learning
c
On Nov 30, 2007, at 9:55 AM, George Kraft wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 17:13 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> I'd ask again about moving to git.
>
> Kumar,
>
> With the volume activity on LTP, then I think CVS is fine and GIT is
> overkill. kernel.org has a differen
On Nov 27, 2007, at 10:56 PM, Masatake YAMATO wrote:
>>> The attached patch adds testcases for sendfile64 system call.
>>>
>>> Please, review.
>>>
>>> Masatake YAMATO
>>
>> shouldn't runtest/syscalls get updated?
>
> I don't understand. Could you tell me more?
I just meant that the list of tests
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -ur ltp.orig/testcases/kernel/syscalls/swapoff/swapoff01.c
ltp/testcases/kernel/syscalls/swapoff/swapoff01.c
--- ltp.orig/testcases/kernel/syscalls/swapoff/swapoff01.c 2005-01-17
16:10:12.0 -0600
+++ ltp/testcases/kernel/sy
On Nov 27, 2007, at 9:03 AM, George Kraft wrote:
> I would like to propose that LTP adopt kernel.org's Developer's
> Certificate of Origin ("sign-off") process.
>
> http://kerneltrap.org/files/Jeremy/DCO.txt
>
> I believe this is an easy quality procedure to help maintain the
> stability of the p
Ok, I'll post some patches to match this.
- k
On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Subrata Modak wrote:
> I would agree with that.
> --Subrata
>
> On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 10:07 -0500, Nate Straz wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 02:17:25PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>&g
On Nov 27, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Masatake YAMATO wrote:
> The attached patch adds testcases for sendfile64 system call.
>
> Please, review.
>
> Masatake YAMATO
shouldn't runtest/syscalls get updated?
- k
-
This SF.net email is
> */
> /* Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
> */
> /**/
>
> I think that should not be a problem with you.
>
> --Subrata--
>
>
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 14:45 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > Add a helper so tests can determi
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:
> I'm trying to figure what the appropriate result is for some tests.
>
> For example, if we run on NFS, the kernel doesn't currently support
> swap over NFS thus should a swapon test return TCONF or TBROK if the
> test detects that
/tst_is_cwd_nfs.c 1969-12-31 18:00:00.0
-0600
+++ ltp/lib/tst_is_cwd_nfs.c2007-11-14 13:29:08.0 -0600
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/*
+ *AUTHOR
+ * Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2007-11-14
+ * based on tst_is_cwd_tmpfs()
+ *
+ *DESCRIPTION
+ * Check if c
I'm trying to figure what the appropriate result is for some tests.
For example, if we run on NFS, the kernel doesn't currently support
swap over NFS thus should a swapon test return TCONF or TBROK if the
test detects that its being run on a NFS fs?
- k
--
Missed this the first go around.
- k
--- testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat05.c 2007-11-09
06:12:45.0 -0600
+++ ../ltp-full-20071031/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/
creat05.c 2007-11-09 04:23:56.0 -0600
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@
int exp_enos[] = {EMFILE, 0};
int fd, ifile, m
On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:23 AM, Subrata Modak wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 08:20 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Nov 14, 2007, at 6:39 AM, Subrata Modak wrote:
>>
>>> Would you like to check BrenoĊ Patch submitted on for nfs mounted
>>> problems and then see
On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Subrata Modak wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 08:25 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> I'm running through the testcases that are part of syscall suite at
>> this point. I think we should work on cleaning up the others. Having
>> control over wh
s in other testcases ??
>
> --Subrata--
>
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 00:34 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Create testfile in tmpdir to be consistent with other tests.
>>
>> The makes the behavior consistent with other testcases if /tmp is a
>> different fs than where the testcase
iced "warnings" when running on nfs).
ltp-close-fds.nfs.patch
Description: Binary data
The fchown issue is different. Is there a link to the mail archive
related to what Breno reported?
- k
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 00:34 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
If we don't close the fd'
Create testfile in tmpdir to be consistent with other tests.
The makes the behavior consistent with other testcases if /tmp is a
different fs than where the testcase is run from.
--- ltp-full-20071031.orig/testcases/kernel/syscalls/splice/splice01.c
2007-11-02 03:34:57.0 -0500
+++ ltp-f
If we don't close the fd's we open and are running on NFS we get warnings
like:
tst_rmdir(): rmobj(/tmp/wri7hJN5W) failed:
unlink(/tmp/wri7hJN5W/.nfs02770dc10001) failed; errno=16: Device or
resource busy
--- ltp-full-20071031.orig/testcases/kernel/syscalls/creat/creat01.c
2007-
I get the following when I run fchown03 on a nfs root fs:
fchown031 FAIL : testfile: Incorrect mode permissions 0104770,
Expected 0100770
Its not clear if this is expected behavior or not on a NFS fs.
- k
-
This SF
On Nov 13, 2007, at 2:23 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2007, at 1:27 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 13 November 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>> any possibility of moving LTP to using git for sou
On Nov 13, 2007, at 1:27 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 November 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> any possibility of moving LTP to using git for source control?
>
> not until sf.net supports it
Any particular reason it has to be hosted on sf.net?
I'm sure kernel.org wo
any possibility of moving LTP to using git for source control?
- k
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using
The gettimeofday01 of day test behaves differently on PPC depending
if we have VDSO (virtual dynamic shared object) support for
gettimeofday or if we use the old syscall.
With the old syscall the test behaves as expected when do:
TEST(gettimeofday((void *)-1, (void *)-1));
w
39 matches
Mail list logo
