LTP release
Hi!
As usuall we will produce a release in Jan 2018.
I'm offline staring tomorrow and will return on Tuesday Jan 02. Feel free to start with replying to this email with a list of patches that should be included in the release, so that I can start picking them up once I return from the Christmas vacation.
I would expect that we will spend at least a week with merging patches and at least a week with a testing and if everything goes well the release would be ready somewhere in the middle of the Jan 2018.
And lastly but not least: Merry Winter solstice & happy Counter Overflow.
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
Hi!
This is just a reminder that we should start working on the January stable release.
I see that we included the meltdown test which I guess was one of the important enough patches to be included.
Anything else that should be taken in before we freeze the git?
I've did some preliminary testing (compiling and runnign LTP on a few selected distros) and haven't found any big issues so far, so it looks like this may as well be smoothest release ever (fingers crossed).
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 4 lines
Hi!
This is just a reminder that we should start working on the January stable release.
Quoted 8 lines
I see that we included the meltdown test which I guess was one of the important enough patches to be included.
Anything else that should be taken in before we freeze the git?
I've did some preliminary testing (compiling and runnign LTP on a few selected distros) and haven't found any big issues so far, so it looks like this may as well be smoothest release ever (fingers crossed).
I ran a test couple days ago with snapshot from 20180103 on RHEL6.2/6.9 and RHEL7.5(beta) across i386/x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x. I'm planning to try also some recent upstream kernel, but as you said so far it looks good.
Regards,
Jan
Quoted 12 lines · Jan Stancek
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 9 lines
Hi!
This is just a reminder that we should start working on the January stable release.I see that we included the meltdown test which I guess was one of the important enough patches to be included.
Anything else that should be taken in before we freeze the git?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I've did some preliminary testing (compiling and runnign LTP on a few selected distros) and haven't found any big issues so far, so it looks like this may as well be smoothest release ever (fingers crossed).
I ran a test couple days ago with snapshot from 20180103 on RHEL6.2/6.9 and RHEL7.5(beta) across i386/x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x. I'm planning to try also some recent upstream kernel, but as you said so far it looks good.
I ran LTP on the upstream kernel-4.15-rc6 across x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x, and catch some failures as below, but currently I haven't get a chance to look into the detail, just post here.
migrate_pages02 FAIL x86_64
------------------------------
migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : pid(15539) migrate pid 0 to node -> 0 migrate_pages02 9 TPASS : pid(15539) addr 0x194f840 is on expected node: 0 migrate_pages02 10 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:165: pid(15539) addr 0x194f840 not on expected node: 0 , expected 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : mem_stats pid: 15539, node: 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : Node id: 1, size: 2044157952, free: 1439322112 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : pid(15535) migrate pid 15539 to node -> 1 migrate_pages02 9 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:129: migrate_pages failed ret: -1, : errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : mem_stats pid: 15539, node: 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : Node id: 1, size: 2044157952, free: 1439358976 migrate_pages02 10 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:301: child returns 256
msgctl11 FAIL s390x
----------------------
msgctl11 0 TINFO : Found 32000 available message queues msgctl11 0 TINFO : Using upto 32698 pids
Fork failure in the second child of child group 682 Fork failure in the first child of child group 9 Fork failure in the first child of child group 191
...
Fork failure in the first child of child group 1490 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1432 Fork failure in the second child of child group 1326 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1327 Fork failure in the first child of child group 638
msgctl11 1 TFAIL : msgctl11.c:205: Fork failed (may be OK if under stress)
shmt02/03/04/05/06/07/08/09/10 FAIL ppc64
-------------------------------------------
shmt02 1 TFAIL : shmt02.c:71: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22 shmt03 1 TFAIL : shmt03.c:72: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22
...
shmt10 2 TFAIL : shmt10.c:98: Error: shmid = -1
switch01 FAIL ppc64(le)
------------------------endian_switch01 1 TFAIL : endian_switch01.c:127: Got SIGILL - test failed
Signature · 5 lines
Li Wang [email protected] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20180110/d8e9c30e/attachment.html>
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 44 lines · Jan Stancek
Quoted 13 lines
----- Original Message -----
Quoted 9 lines
Hi!
This is just a reminder that we should start working on the January stable release.I see that we included the meltdown test which I guess was one of the important enough patches to be included.
Anything else that should be taken in before we freeze the git?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I've did some preliminary testing (compiling and runnign LTP on a few selected distros) and haven't found any big issues so far, so it looks like this may as well be smoothest release ever (fingers crossed).
I ran a test couple days ago with snapshot from 20180103 on RHEL6.2/6.9 and RHEL7.5(beta) across i386/x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x. I'm planning to try also some recent upstream kernel, but as you said so far it looks good.
I ran LTP on the upstream kernel-4.15-rc6 across x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x, and catch some failures as below, but currently I haven't get a chance to look into the detail, just post here.
migrate_pages02FAILx86_64
------------------------------migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : pid(15539) migrate pid 0 to node -> 0 migrate_pages02 9 TPASS : pid(15539) addr 0x194f840 is on expected node: 0 migrate_pages02 10 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:165: pid(15539) addr 0x194f840 not on expected node: 0 , expected 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : mem_stats pid: 15539, node: 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : Node id: 1, size: 2044157952, free: 1439322112 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : pid(15535) migrate pid 15539 to node -> 1 migrate_pages02 9 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:129: migrate_pages failed ret: -1, : errno=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : mem_stats pid: 15539, node: 1 migrate_pages02 0 TINFO : Node id: 1, size: 2044157952, free:
Quoted 2 lines
1439358976
migrate_pages0210 TFAIL : migrate_pages02.c:301: child returns 256
numactl -H output could be helpful here.
Quoted 7 lines
msgctl11 FAIL s390x
----------------------msgctl11 0 TINFO : Found 32000 available message queues msgctl11 0 TINFO : Using upto 32698 pids
Quoted 11 lines
Fork failure in the second child of child group 682 Fork failure in the first child of child group 9 Fork failure in the first child of child group 191
...
Fork failure in the first child of child group 1490 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1432 Fork failure in the second child of child group 1326 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1327 Fork failure in the first child of child group 638
msgctl11 1 TFAIL : msgctl11.c:205: Fork failed (may be OK if under
stress)
I have very old note this test spawns large number of children, so I'm assuming this is not a regression.
Quoted 12 lines
shmt02/03/04/05/06/07/08/09/10 FAIL ppc64
-------------------------------------------shmt02 1 TFAIL : shmt02.c:71: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22 shmt03 1 TFAIL : shmt03.c:72: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22...
shmt10 2 TFAIL : shmt10.c:98: Error: shmid = -1
Quoted 4 lines
switch01 FAIL ppc64(le)
------------------------endian_switch011 TFAIL : endian_switch01.c:127: Got SIGILL - test
failed
This is new failure since 4.15-rc1:
commit 727f13616c45caa72e4325c5027c1a8f41e745a9
Author: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Oct 9 21:54:05 2017 +1100
powerpc: Disable the fast-endian switch syscall by default
One way would be to check if "/boot/config-$(uname -r)" exists and contains "CONFIG_PPC_FAST_ENDIAN_SWITCH=y".
Or perhaps we can try to make switch only (0x1ebe), check if that returns ENOSYS. If not we run current do_le_switch(). I'll try this latter approach.
Regards,
Jan
Hi!
Quoted 16 lines
Quoted 4 lines
msgctl11 FAIL s390x
----------------------msgctl11 0 TINFO : Found 32000 available message queues msgctl11 0 TINFO : Using upto 32698 pidsQuoted 11 lines
Fork failure in the second child of child group 682 Fork failure in the first child of child group 9 Fork failure in the first child of child group 191
...
Fork failure in the first child of child group 1490 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1432 Fork failure in the second child of child group 1326 Fork failure in the first child of child group 1327 Fork failure in the first child of child group 638
msgctl11 1 TFAIL : msgctl11.c:205: Fork failed (may be OK if under
stress)
Quoted 2 lines
I have very old note this test spawns large number of children, so I'm assuming this is not a regression.
This fails unless you have at lest 2GB of memory on x86_64 but may need more depending on system page size and system overcommit settings. I recall that at some point kernel tracking of available memory got better which caused this test to fail (instead of causing period of heavy swapping).
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
Hi!
Is there anything else that should be looked into before the release?
I suppose that Jan should push the fix for ppc endian switch.
I will do a bit more testing next week and I would like to finish the release ideally at the end of the next week. Is that okay with everyone or do we need more time?
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
Hi!
Quoted 3 lines
I will do a bit more testing next week and I would like to finish the release ideally at the end of the next week. Is that okay with everyone or do we need more time?
Can I proceed with the release tomorrow?
Has anybody something that should be considered before I tag the git?
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
Quoted 6 lines
I ran LTP on the upstream kernel-4.15-rc6 across x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x, and catch some failures as below, but currently I haven't get a chance to look into the detail, just post here.
migrate_pages02FAILx86_64
I posted patch for this, but since it's only rc kernels it can wait.
Quoted 6 lines
shmt02/03/04/05/06/07/08/09/10 FAIL ppc64
-------------------------------------------shmt02 1 TFAIL : shmt02.c:71: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22 shmt03 1 TFAIL : shmt03.c:72: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno = 22...
shmt10 2 TFAIL : shmt10.c:98: Error: shmid = -1
I haven't seen this in my tests. Are you able to reproduce it?
Quoted 1 line
switch01 FAIL ppc64(le)
Just pushed patch for this one.
Regards,
Jan
Quoted 14 lines · Jan Stancek
Quoted 1 line
I ran LTP on the upstream kernel-4.15-rc6 across
x86_64/ppc64(le)/s390x,
Quoted 1 line
and catch some failures as below, but currently I haven't get a chance
to
Quoted 4 lines
look into the detail, just post here.
migrate_pages02FAILx86_64I posted patch for this, but since it's only rc kernels it can wait.
Quoted 3 lines
shmt02/03/04/05/06/07/08/09/10 FAIL ppc64
-------------------------------------------
shmt02 1 TFAIL : shmt02.c:71: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno =
Quoted 8 lines
22
Quoted 1 line
shmt03 1 TFAIL : shmt03.c:72: shmget Failed: shmid = -1, errno =
22
Quoted 2 lines
...
shmt10 2 TFAIL : shmt10.c:98: Error: shmid = -1I haven't seen this in my tests. Are you able to reproduce it?
That's a little bit strange, I see these failures on a kvm guest system. But after reserving it to run by manual, I could NOT reproduce it any more. :(
Signature · 5 lines
Li Wang [email protected] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20180114/c5450fab/attachment.html>
Hello,
Quoted 8 lines · Cyril Hrubis
Hi!
As usuall we will produce a release in Jan 2018.I'm offline staring tomorrow and will return on Tuesday Jan 02. Feel free to start with replying to this email with a list of patches that should be included in the release, so that I can start picking them up once I return from the Christmas vacation.
Quoted 10 lines
I would expect that we will spend at least a week with merging patches and at least a week with a testing and if everything goes well the release would be ready somewhere in the middle of the Jan 2018.
And lastly but not least: Merry Winter solstice & happy Counter Overflow.
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]
This can be included:
https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/pull/238
Signature · 2 lines
Thank you, Richard.
Cyril Hrubis
AppliedHi!
Quoted 2 lines
This can be included:
https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/pull/238
Applied.
Signature · 2 lines
Cyril Hrubis [email protected]