From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-06 06:31:14
Attachments:
0001-numa_helper-move-to-libkerntest.patch
|
libnuma_helper could be used by testcases both under syscalls/ and mem/, it's better to add a new common lib in their parent dir, so I created libkerntest under testcases/kernel/lib/, and put numa_helper to it. In the future, we can add more APIs to it. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> --- testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk | 37 +++ testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h | 37 +++ testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile | 29 +++ testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 ++++++++++++++++++++++ testcases/kernel/syscalls/get_mempolicy/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/mbind/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile | 22 -- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc | 27 --- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile | 26 -- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 ---------------------- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h | 37 --- 12 files changed, 372 insertions(+), 381 deletions(-) create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-07-31 02:57:41
Attachments:
0001-numa_helper-move-to-libkerntest.patch
|
libnuma_helper could be used by testcases both under syscalls/ and mem/, it's better to add a new common lib in their parent dir, so I created libkerntest under testcases/kernel/lib/, and put numa_helper to it. In the future, we can add more APIs to it. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> --- testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk | 37 +++ testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h | 37 +++ testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile | 29 +++ testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 ++++++++++++++++++++++ testcases/kernel/syscalls/get_mempolicy/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/mbind/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile | 2 +- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile | 22 -- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc | 27 --- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile | 26 -- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 ---------------------- testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h | 37 --- 12 files changed, 372 insertions(+), 381 deletions(-) create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-07-31 02:57:43
Attachments:
0002-mm-use-new-numa_helper.patch
|
This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in libkerntest. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> --- testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 +++--- testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++------ testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + 16 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) |
From: Garrett C. <yan...@gm...> - 2012-07-31 04:03:34
|
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> wrote: > > This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in libkerntest. > > Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> Inline patches are easier to review... >- tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "required a NUMA system."); >+ tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "require a NUMA system."); `requires` is probably what was meant here, but nonetheless the comment is incomplete. > /* shared */ >-long count_numa(long nodes[]); >+unsigned get_a_numa_node(void (*cleanup_fn)(void)); Please use `unsigned int`. Thanks, -Garrett |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2012-07-31 07:38:21
|
Hi Caspar, ------- snip -------- + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 2, &nd1, &nd2); + switch (ret) { + case 0: + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd2); + return nd2; + case -3: + /* + * for unbalanced NUMA systems, at least 1 available node is + * required. + */ + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 1, &nd1); + switch (ret) { + case 0: + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd1); + return nd1; + case -3: + tst_brkm(TCONF, cleanup_fn, "require a NUMA system " + "that has at least one node with both " + "memory and cpu available."); + default: + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, + "3rd get_allowed_nodes"); + } + } + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, "2nd get_allowed_nodes"); ------- snip -------- I'm not sure I follow this snippet. So if there are 2+ nodes, it takes second one. If there is just one, it will take that one. Can't it take always first one? Regards, Jan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > Sent: Tuesday, 31 July, 2012 4:57:19 AM > Subject: [LTP] [PATCH/RFE 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper > > > This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in > libkerntest. > > Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> > --- > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 +++--- > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 61 > +++++++++++++++++------ > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + > 16 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in > malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > Ltp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-01 08:56:05
|
On 07/31/2012 03:38 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > Hi Caspar, > > ------- snip -------- > + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 2, &nd1, &nd2); > + switch (ret) { > + case 0: > + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd2); > + return nd2; > + case -3: > + /* > + * for unbalanced NUMA systems, at least 1 available node is > + * required. > + */ > + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 1, &nd1); > + switch (ret) { > + case 0: > + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd1); > + return nd1; > + case -3: > + tst_brkm(TCONF, cleanup_fn, "require a NUMA system " > + "that has at least one node with both " > + "memory and cpu available."); > + default: > + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, > + "3rd get_allowed_nodes"); > + } > + } > + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, "2nd get_allowed_nodes"); > ------- snip -------- > > I'm not sure I follow this snippet. > So if there are 2+ nodes, it takes second one. If there is just one, it will take that one. > Can't it take always first one? It was the original design. Since a non-NUMA system have 1 node, the first (and the only) node should have been tested already in ksm01/oom01/etc cases. To increase test coverage, we chose 2nd node on NUMA system. As to the fallback to 1 node design, if an unbalanced system only contains 1 available node, we still want to test NUMA in separate case, ksm01/oom01/etc cases would probably fail to cover it. Do you think it will affect test coverage if we always test first node? Thanks, Caspar > > Regards, > Jan > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> >> To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> >> Sent: Tuesday, 31 July, 2012 4:57:19 AM >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH/RFE 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper >> >> >> This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in >> libkerntest. >> >> Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> >> --- >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 +++--- >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 61 >> +++++++++++++++++------ >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- >> testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + >> 16 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. >> Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in >> malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Ltp-list mailing list >> Ltp...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list >> |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2012-08-01 10:24:08
|
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > To: "Jan Stancek" <jst...@re...> > Cc: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > Sent: Wednesday, 1 August, 2012 10:55:47 AM > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH/RFE 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper > > On 07/31/2012 03:38 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > > Hi Caspar, > > > > ------- snip -------- > > + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 2, &nd1, &nd2); > > + switch (ret) { > > + case 0: > > + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd2); > > + return nd2; > > + case -3: > > + /* > > + * for unbalanced NUMA systems, at least 1 available node is > > + * required. > > + */ > > + ret = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_CPUS, 1, &nd1); > > + switch (ret) { > > + case 0: > > + tst_resm(TINFO, "get node%lu.", nd1); > > + return nd1; > > + case -3: > > + tst_brkm(TCONF, cleanup_fn, "require a NUMA system " > > + "that has at least one node with both " > > + "memory and cpu available."); > > + default: > > + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, > > + "3rd get_allowed_nodes"); > > + } > > + } > > + tst_brkm(TBROK|TERRNO, cleanup_fn, "2nd get_allowed_nodes"); > > ------- snip -------- > > > > I'm not sure I follow this snippet. > > So if there are 2+ nodes, it takes second one. If there is just > > one, it will take that one. > > Can't it take always first one? > > It was the original design. Since a non-NUMA system have 1 node, the > first (and the only) node should have been tested already in > ksm01/oom01/etc cases. To increase test coverage, we chose 2nd node > on > NUMA system. > > As to the fallback to 1 node design, if an unbalanced system only > contains 1 available node, we still want to test NUMA in separate > case, > ksm01/oom01/etc cases would probably fail to cover it. Agreed, having separate testcase for NUMA makes sense. > > Do you think it will affect test coverage if we always test first > node? I'm leaning towards "no". I'm assuming oom01 is using default mem policy, so it can allocate memory from any node (including second one). Issue 2. -------- I noticed you put call to "get_a_numa_node()" to "oom()" and "testoom()", which is called also from oom01. As I understand from your previous email, this test should not be NUMA-aware, correct? <<<test_start>>> tag=oom01 stime=1343713154 cmdline="oom01" contacts="" analysis=exit <<<test_output>>> oom01 0 TINFO : set overcommit_memory to 2 oom01 1 TCONF : require a NUMA system. oom01 2 TCONF : Remaining cases not appropriate for configuration oom01 0 TINFO : set overcommit_memory to 0 <<<execution_status>>> Regards, Jan > > Thanks, > Caspar > > > > Regards, > > Jan > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > >> To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > >> Sent: Tuesday, 31 July, 2012 4:57:19 AM > >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH/RFE 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper > >> > >> > >> This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in > >> libkerntest. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> > >> --- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 +++--- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 61 > >> +++++++++++++++++------ > >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- > >> testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + > >> testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + > >> 16 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Live Security Virtual Conference > >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > >> Discussions > >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in > >> malware > >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Ltp-list mailing list > >> Ltp...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > >> > > > |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-01 11:23:43
|
On 08/01/2012 06:23 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > I noticed you put call to "get_a_numa_node()" to "oom()" and "testoom()", > which is called also from oom01. As I understand from your previous > email, this test should not be NUMA-aware, correct? I missed a `if (mempolicy)` inside oom() {....} :-( Nice catch! Thanks! Caspar > > <<<test_start>>> > tag=oom01 stime=1343713154 > cmdline="oom01" > contacts="" > analysis=exit > <<<test_output>>> > oom01 0 TINFO : set overcommit_memory to 2 > oom01 1 TCONF : require a NUMA system. > oom01 2 TCONF : Remaining cases not appropriate for configuration > oom01 0 TINFO : set overcommit_memory to 0 > <<<execution_status>>> > > Regards, > Jan |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-01 11:25:31
|
On 08/01/2012 06:23 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: >> >Do you think it will affect test coverage if we always test first >> >node? > I'm leaning towards "no". I'm assuming oom01 is using default mem policy, > so it can allocate memory from any node (including second one). OK, I think I'm agreeing with you now. If there's no objection, I'll update my patch to choose 1st node to simplify the code. Caspar |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-06 06:31:16
Attachments:
0002-mm-use-new-numa_helper.patch
|
This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in libkerntest. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> --- testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 ++++---- testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++-------- testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/vma/Makefile | 3 +- testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma02.c | 19 ++++++--- testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma04.c | 11 ++++- 19 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2012-08-06 08:16:46
|
Hi Caspar, There seems to be a typo in vma02.c and vma04.c: "err = -3" + } else { + err = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_MEMS, 1, &node); + if (err = -3) + tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "requires at least one node."); also in vma04.c, ret variable is not used, so perhaps it can be removed: + int lc, node, ret, err; Regards, Jan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > Sent: Monday, 6 August, 2012 8:30:51 AM > Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper > > > This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in > libkerntest. > > Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> > --- > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 ++++---- > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 50 > ++++++++++++++++-------- > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/Makefile | 3 +- > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma02.c | 19 ++++++--- > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma04.c | 11 ++++- > 19 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in > malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > Ltp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-06 08:33:31
|
On 08/06/2012 04:16 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > Hi Caspar, > > There seems to be a typo in vma02.c and vma04.c: "err = -3" > > + } else { > > + err = get_allowed_nodes(NH_MEMS|NH_MEMS, 1, &node); > > + if (err = -3) > > + tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "requires at least one node."); > > also in vma04.c, ret variable is not used, so perhaps it can be removed: > + int lc, node, ret, err; Oops... Thanks for reviewing! a V3 will come out soon. Caspar > > Regards, > Jan > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> >> To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> >> Sent: Monday, 6 August, 2012 8:30:51 AM >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper >> >> >> This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in >> libkerntest. >> >> Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> >> --- >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 ++++---- >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- >> testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 50 >> ++++++++++++++++-------- >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- >> testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- >> testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + >> testcases/kernel/mem/vma/Makefile | 3 +- >> testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma02.c | 19 ++++++--- >> testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma04.c | 11 ++++- >> 19 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. >> Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in >> malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Ltp-list mailing list >> Ltp...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list >> |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-06 08:38:45
Attachments:
0001-mm-use-new-numa_helper.patch
|
This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in libkerntest. Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> --- testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 ++++---- testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++-------- testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + testcases/kernel/mem/vma/Makefile | 3 +- testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma02.c | 19 ++++++--- testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma04.c | 11 ++++- 19 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2012-08-06 09:32:36
|
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > Sent: Monday, 6 August, 2012 10:38:22 AM > Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: use new numa_helper > > > This patch makes the tests in mem/ dir use numa_helper in > libkerntest. > > Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> > --- > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/cpuset/cpuset01.c | 16 ++++---- > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/Makefile.inc | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/hugetlb/hugemmap/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/include/mem.h | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm02.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/ksm/ksm04.c | 9 ++-- > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/lib/mem.c | 50 > ++++++++++++++++-------- > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom02.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/oom/oom04.c | 4 -- > testcases/kernel/mem/swapping/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/thp/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/tunable/Makefile | 1 + > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/Makefile | 3 +- > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma02.c | 19 ++++++--- > testcases/kernel/mem/vma/vma04.c | 11 ++++- > 19 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) > V3 looks OK to me. Regards, Jan > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in > malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > Ltp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > |
From: Jan S. <jst...@re...> - 2012-08-06 09:40:00
|
Hi Caspar, I found one small issue during my testing, but I suppose this can be fixed in follow-up patch without need to resend whole series. When I do "make clean" from LTP root, kernel/lib is not cleaned: # ll testcases/kernel/lib/ total 36 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 9704 Aug 6 05:27 libkerntest.a -rw-rw-r--. 1 501 501 1051 Aug 6 03:21 Makefile -rw-rw-r--. 1 501 501 6424 Aug 6 03:21 numa_helper.c -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 9456 Aug 6 05:27 numa_helper.o Regards, Jan ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> > To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> > Sent: Monday, 6 August, 2012 8:30:50 AM > Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] numa_helper: move to libkerntest > > > libnuma_helper could be used by testcases both under syscalls/ and > mem/, > it's better to add a new common lib in their parent dir, so I created > libkerntest under testcases/kernel/lib/, and put numa_helper to it. > In > the future, we can add more APIs to it. > > Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> > --- > testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk | 37 +++ > testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h | 37 +++ > testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile | 29 +++ > testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > testcases/kernel/syscalls/get_mempolicy/Makefile | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/mbind/Makefile | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile | 2 +- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile | 22 -- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc | 27 --- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile | 26 -- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 > ---------------------- > testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h | 37 --- > 12 files changed, 372 insertions(+), 381 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk > create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h > create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile > create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c > delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile > delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc > delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile > delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c > delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. > Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in > malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Ltp-list mailing list > Ltp...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > |
From: Caspar Z. <ca...@ca...> - 2012-08-06 11:59:13
|
On 08/06/2012 05:39 PM, Jan Stancek wrote: > Hi Caspar, > > I found one small issue during my testing, but I suppose this can be fixed > in follow-up patch without need to resend whole series. > > When I do "make clean" from LTP root, kernel/lib is not cleaned: > # ll testcases/kernel/lib/ > total 36 > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 9704 Aug 6 05:27 libkerntest.a > -rw-rw-r--. 1 501 501 1051 Aug 6 03:21 Makefile > -rw-rw-r--. 1 501 501 6424 Aug 6 03:21 numa_helper.c > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 9456 Aug 6 05:27 numa_helper.o > > Regards, > Jan I'll fix it soon. thanks! Caspar > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Caspar Zhang" <ca...@ca...> >> To: "LTP List" <ltp...@li...> >> Sent: Monday, 6 August, 2012 8:30:50 AM >> Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/2] numa_helper: move to libkerntest >> >> >> libnuma_helper could be used by testcases both under syscalls/ and >> mem/, >> it's better to add a new common lib in their parent dir, so I created >> libkerntest under testcases/kernel/lib/, and put numa_helper to it. >> In >> the future, we can add more APIs to it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Caspar Zhang <ca...@ca...> >> --- >> testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk | 37 +++ >> testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h | 37 +++ >> testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile | 29 +++ >> testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/get_mempolicy/Makefile | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/mbind/Makefile | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/move_pages/Makefile | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile | 22 -- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc | 27 --- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile | 26 -- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c | 266 >> ---------------------- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h | 37 --- >> 12 files changed, 372 insertions(+), 381 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/lib.mk >> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/include/numa_helper.h >> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/Makefile >> create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/lib/numa_helper.c >> delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile >> delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/Makefile.inc >> delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/Makefile >> delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.c >> delete mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/numa/lib/numa_helper.h >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Live Security Virtual Conference >> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and >> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. >> Discussions >> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in >> malware >> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ >> _______________________________________________ >> Ltp-list mailing list >> Ltp...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list >> |