lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
Subjectlinux test project results on 2.4.11-pre6 and 2.4.10-ac10


Summary
-------

2.4.11-pre6 PASS on 10870 and 10874 test cases on Athlon.
2.4.10-ac10 PASS on 25174 and 25175 test cases on Athlon.

2.4.11-pre6 PASS on 11869 and 11870 test cases on Toshiba.
2.4.10-ac10 PASS on 14948 and 14949 test cases on Toshiba.

The difference in PASS cases is primarily from the fork07
test which creates processes until max-threads.
2.4.10-ac10 has a higher max-thread value.

Tests run twice on each kernel on two machines:
Second test started immediately after the first completed.

Hardware
--------
Athlon 1333 with 512 mb RAM, reiserfs
Toshiba Tecra 8000, Pentium II with 192 mb RAM, ext2

ver_linux
---------
Gnu C 2.95.3
Gnu make 3.79.1
binutils 2.11.2
util-linux 2.11l
mount 2.11l
modutils 2.4.10
e2fsprogs 1.25
reiserfsprogs 3.x.0j
PPP 2.4.1
Linux C Library 2.2.4
Dynamic linker (ldd) 2.2.4
Procps 2.0.7
Net-tools 1.60
Kbd 1.06
Sh-utils 2.0


Recent PASS cases
------ ---- -----
The 4 tests below failed on 2.4.10-ac4 but now PASS on 2.4.10-ac10
and 2.4.11-pre6.

fcntl07 3 FAIL : setreuid to user nobody failed, errno: 1
fcntl07 3 FAIL : child returned bad exit status
vhangup01 1 FAIL : setreuid failed
vhangup02 1 FAIL : vhangup() failed, errno:1

Hmm. I didn't have a "nobody" account until recently. That explains
at least one of those FAILs.


ftruncate03
-----------
2.4.10-ac10 uniquely gives FAIL on this test:

ftruncate03 1 FAIL : ftruncate() fails, File descriptor not open for writing, errno=22, expected errno:13


ioctl02
-------
Intermitantly the test suite pauses with this test (2 ioctl02 processes).
"ps aux" shows ioctl02 processes in STAT T.

ioctl02 -D /dev/tty0

kill -9 on the parent ioctl02 allows test to continue.

I've seen this test hang before, approximately 10% of the time.
(One hang on Toshiba running 2.4.11-pre6 in this set of runs)

growfiles
---------

This indicates the Athlon completed all timed growfiles tests.

Linux rushmore 2.4.11-pre6 897121 iterations on 41 files in 760 seconds
Linux rushmore 2.4.11-pre6 895800 iterations on 41 files in 760 seconds
Linux rushmore 2.4.10-ac10 925176 iterations on 41 files in 760 seconds
Linux rushmore 2.4.10-ac10 907735 iterations on 41 files in 760 seconds


The laptop did not complete all the timed runs:

Linux molehill 2.4.11-pre6 503734 iterations on 40 files in 640 seconds
Linux molehill 2.4.11-pre6 506124 iterations on 40 files in 640 seconds
Linux molehill 2.4.10-ac10 512558 iterations on 30 files in 520 seconds
Linux molehill 2.4.10-ac10 513130 iterations on 30 files in 520 seconds


growfiles -b -e 1 -i 0 -L 120 -u -g 5000 -T 100 -t 499990 -l -C 10 -c 1000 -S 10 -f Lgf03_
growfiles: 5380 growfiles.c/2085: 9203 tlibio.c/706 write(3, buf, 5000) returned=4464
growfiles: 5380 growfiles.c/1622: 9203 Hit max errors value of 1

growfiles -b -e 1 -u -r 1-49600 -I r -u -i 0 -L 120 Lgfile1
growfiles: 5378 growfiles.c/2085: 16829 tlibio.c/706 write(3, buf, 37537) returned=37123
growfiles: 5378 growfiles.c/1622: 16829 Hit max errors value of 1

Actually, the laptop is short of disk space (331 megs free at the moment).
These look like long hand for "out of space". I'll do better next time.


Intermitent FAIL cases
----------------------
First run on 2.4.10-ac10 on Toshiba laptop produced:
nanosleep02 1 FAIL : Remaining sleep time doesn't match with the expected 4 time
nanosleep02 1 FAIL : child process exited abnormally

Second run on 2.4.10-ac10
recvmsg01 5 FAIL : invalid recv buffer ; returned -1 (expected 0), errno 14 (expected 88)

First run on 2.4.11-pre6
readlink04 1 FAIL : readlink() on slink_file failed, errno=2 : No such file or directory


common FAIL cases
------ ---- -----
2.4.11-pre6 and 2.4.10-ac10 produced FAIL on these tests for both computers:

execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
execve06 1 FAIL : Execve fail, execve06, errno = 2
personality02 1 FAIL : call failed - errno = 0 - Success
pread02 2 FAIL : pread() returned 0, expected -1, errno:22
recv01 3 FAIL : invalid recv buffer ; returned 0 (expected -1), errno 88 (expected 14)
setpgid03 2 FAIL : setpgid FAILED, expect EACCES got 1
shmdt02 1 FAIL : call succeeded unexpectedly
waitpid05 6 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 3
waitpid05 9 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 4
waitpid05 12 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 5
waitpid05 15 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 6
waitpid05 18 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 8
waitpid05 23 FAIL : signal error: core dump bit not set for exception number 11


Currently BROKen tests in my configuration
-----------------------------------------
These tests currently don't run. If you know why, please enlighten me.

fcntl05 1 BROK : Unexpected signal 15 received.
fcntl05 1 BROK : Unexpected signal 15 received.
sched_getscheduler01 1 BROK : Unexpected signal 11 received.
sched_getscheduler01 2 BROK : Remaining cases broken
sched_getscheduler01 3 BROK : Remaining cases broken
sched_setscheduler02 1 BROK : Unexpected signal 11 received.


Unique BROK results
-------------------
First run of 2.4.10-ac10 on laptop:

shmctl01 4 BROK : shmctl succeeded on expected fail

First run of 2.4.11-pre6 on laptop:

readlink04 1 BROK : Unexpected signal 15 received.
shmctl01 4 BROK : shmctl succeeded on expected fail


--
Randy Hron

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:05    [W:0.050 / U:0.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site