Re: s390 user_enable_single_step() (Was: odd utrace testing results on s390x)

Cai, any chance you can help? Using /usr/bin/console I can't choose anotherkernel at the 00: Please choose (default will boot in 15 seconds): stage, how can I do this??? As Heiko mentioned, I did manage to enter, #cp vi vmsg 2 during the prompt to get to the second kernel to boot...

Re: [PATCH 0/7] utrace/ptrace

This is the new iteration of Roland's utrace patch, this time with rewrite-ptrace-via-utrace + cleanups in utrace core. Tested-by: CAI Qian caiq...@redhat.com

Re: odd utrace testing results on s390x

Could you please re-test with this patch applied? It turned out that this patch did not make much difference. the step-simple is still failing with the patch applied. It could be reproduced a few times after a fresh reboot. The test exited with 1 here, /* Known bug in 2.6.28-rc7 +

Re: new Fedora 13 utrace kernel

Hi Roland, The utrace patch looks suspicious in utrace.h, which cause the compilation failure without CONFIG_UTRACE. I have confirmed that the git tree looks sane. +static inline void utrace_init_task(struct task_struct *child) +{ +} +{ +} + Thanks, CAI Qian

Tests Failures on PPC64

This is seen with and without CONFIG_UTRACE. FAIL: watchpoint ppc-dabr-race: ./../tests/ppc-dabr-race.c:141: handler_fail: Assertion `0' failed. /bin/sh: line 5: 31750 Aborted ${dir}$tst FAIL: ppc-dabr-race Are those known issues? Thanks, CAI Qian

Re: powerpc: step-jump-cont failure (Was: [PATCH] utrace: don't set -ops = utrace_detached_ops lockless)

I'll try to investigate, but currently I am all confused, and I suspect we have some user-space issues. If only I knew something about ppc... Sorry for the confusing. Ananth, could you please confirm once again that step-jump-cont (from ptrace-tests testsuite) not fail on your machine? If

Re: [PATCH] utrace: don't set -ops = utrace_detached_ops lockless

Yes, it looks good so far. Ptrace tests also does not show any regression. I said this too early. Looks like step-jump-count started to fail now. step-jump-cont: step-jump-cont.c:244: main: Assertion `0' failed. /bin/sh: line 5: 28212 Aborted ${dir}$tst FAIL: step-jump-cont

step-into-handler.c compilation failure on ppc64

# make check ... gcc -DPACKAGE_NAME=\ptrace\ regression\ test\ suite\ -DPACKAGE_TARNAME=\ptrace-tests\ -DPACKAGE_VERSION=\0.1\ -DPACKAGE_STRING=\ptrace\ regression\ test\ suite\ 0.1\ -DPACKAGE_BUGREPORT=\utrace-de...@redhat.com\ -DPACKAGE=\ptrace-tests\ -DVERSION=\0.1\ -DSTDC_HEADERS=1

Ptrace Testsuite Results for CONFIG_UTRACE

Hello! Please find below results by using the latest ptrace testsuite with and without CONFIG_UTRACE. Overall, There did not look like some regression. The failures were getting less with the ptrace-utrace patchset applied. There are some tests failed for both kernels. * detach-sigkill-race *

GDB Testsuite Results with CONFIG_UTRACE i686

Hello! Those are the test results on i686 F12 hosts with and without CONFIG_UTRACE. Interesting thing is that the results on quite different on two Intel hosts. gdb.sum is from without CONFIG_UTRACE. Thanks! CAI Qian ProLiant DL360 G4p (Intel) diff -u gdb.sum gdb-utrace.sum --- gdb.sum

GDB Testsuite Results for CONFIG_UTRACE with biarch

Hello! Please find biarch testing results with or without CONFIG_UTRACE below from 2 Intel and 1 AMD CPU F12 x86_64 systems. gdb-32.sum was for 32-bit run with 32-bit GDB; while gdb-64.sum was for 32-bit run with 64-bit GDB. All logs can be found at, http://people.redhat.com/qcai/kratochvil/

GDB Testsuite Results with CONFIG_UTRACE

Hello! The test was conducted on linux-2.6-utrace utrace-ptrace branch with and without CONFIG_UTRACE. The machine was an Intel x86_64 system. Biarch and other testing are under way. Here is the diff, and the results look similar. Detailed logs can be found at,

utrace tests

Hello! Sorry for the cross-posting. Wondering if there are some existing utrace tests that can be used for regression testing. There is a ntrace tests under, http://people.redhat.com/roland/utrace/old/ Are those tests still relevant? Thanks! CAI Qian