Hi YongKang, Xiantao,
Thanks for your investigation!
> The LTP which we used is okay for 2.6.12. But the latest kernel has some
change
> in af_inet.c. And the error number is also changed.
This problem was able to be understood from the investigation with akio.
But, I did not notice that there was a cause on the LTP side :-P
> So I suggest we all upgrade the LTP to latest one 20060305 to fix for the
2.6.16
> kernel. :)
Okey, I also update to your LTPver.
Thanks,
Fujita
> -----Original Message-----
> From: You, Yongkang [mailto:yongkang.you@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:48 PM
> To: You, Yongkang; yo.fujita; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd week]
>
> Hi Fujita,
>
> After do some investigation with Xiantao, the two failed cases are because
we
> used out of date LTP. :(
>
> The LTP which we used is okay for 2.6.12. But the latest kernel has some
change
> in af_inet.c. And the error number is also changed.
>
> I have checked the latest LTP. 20060306. Its source also has the update:
> --- old/socket01.c 2006-03-13 15:44:43.000000000 +0800
> +++ new/socket01.c 2006-03-13 15:44:08.000000000 +0800
> @@ -112,9 +112,9 @@
> }
> if (TEST_RETURN != tdat[testno].retval ||
> (TEST_RETURN < 0 &&
> - TEST_ERRNO != tdat[testno].experrno)) {
> - tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s ; returned"
> - " %d (expected %d), errno %d (expected"
> + (TEST_ERRNO != tdat[testno].experrno && TEST_ERRNO != EPROTONOSUPPORT)))
> { /* Change for defect 21065 for kernel change */
> + tst_resm(TFAIL, "%s ; returned" /* of return code for this test but
don't
> want */
> + " %d (expected %d), errno %d (expected" /* to break on older kernels */
> " %d)", tdat[testno].desc,
> s, tdat[testno].retval,
> TEST_ERRNO, tdat[testno].experrno);
>
>
> So I suggest we all upgrade the LTP to latest one 20060305 to fix for the
2.6.16
> kernel. :)
>
> Best Regards,
> Yongkang (Kangkang) 永康
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of You,
> >Yongkang
> >Sent: 2006年3月13日 9:36
> >To: yo.fujita; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd week]
> >
> >Hi Fujita,
> >
> >Thanks for your detail information. I also got the same result like
yours.
> But I
> >made a mistake that I said it might relate to xenU unusable network. I
forgot
> it
> >was running in Xen0. :) Xen0 network should be okay.
> >
> >There should be some problems, for my LTP result on Native (pure RHEL4u2
> >with Tiger2) show these 2 cases are both pass.
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >Yongkang (Kangkang) 永康
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: yo.fujita [mailto:yo.fujita@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>Sent: 2006年3月13日 9:24
> >>To: You, Yongkang; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd week]
> >>
> >>Hi YongKang,
> >>
> >>> EM〜 From the log, there are only 4 failed cases. Two are known float
> >>issue.
> >>> The other 2 names are related to socket, it may related no network in
> >>XenU.
> >>I think so.
> >>
> >>This is detailed result of socket01.
> >>socket01 1 PASS : invalid domain successful
> >>socket01 2 PASS : invalid type successful
> >>socket01 3 PASS : UNIX domain dgram successful
> >>socket01 4 FAIL : raw open as non-root ; returned -1 (expected
-1),
> >>errno 93 (expected 94)
> >>socket01 5 PASS : UDP socket successful
> >>socket01 6 FAIL : UDP stream ; returned -1 (expected -1), errno 93
> >>(expected 94)
> >>socket01 7 FAIL : TCP dgram ; returned -1 (expected -1), errno 93
> >>(expected 94)
> >>socket01 8 PASS : TCP socket successful
> >>socket01 9 FAIL : ICMP stream ; returned -1 (expected -1), errno
93
> >>(expected 94)
> >>
> >>Similarly, it's socketpair01.
> >>socketpair01 1 PASS : invalid domain successful
> >>socketpair01 2 PASS : invalid type successful
> >>socketpair01 3 PASS : UNIX domain dgram successful
> >>socketpair01 4 FAIL : raw open as non-root ; returned -1 (expected
> >>-1), errno 93 (expected 94)
> >>socketpair01 5 PASS : bad pointer successful
> >>socketpair01 6 PASS : bad pointer successful
> >>socketpair01 7 PASS : UDP socket successful
> >>socketpair01 8 FAIL : TCP dgram ; returned -1 (expected -1), errno
93
> >>(expected 94)
> >>socketpair01 9 PASS : TCP socket successful
> >>socketpair01 10 FAIL : ICMP stream ; returned -1 (expected -1),
errno
> >>93 (expected 94)
> >>
> >>Does your result match to this?
> >>It might be due to the environment if differing.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Fujita
> >>
> >>> Best Regards,
> >>> Yongkang (Kangkang) 永康
> >>> >-----Original Message-----
> >>> >From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
nakato
> >>> >Sent: 2006年3月10日 19:51
> >>> >To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd week]
> >>> >
> >>> >Hi.
> >>> >I'm Watanabe, co-worker of Fujita.
> >>> >He's going out now for his unavoidable reason,
> >>> >so I'll send the report instead today.
> >>> >
> >>> >TEST RESULT
> >>> > 5/816 FAIL (Please see the attached files)
> >>> >
> >>> >Thanks.
> >>> >Watanabe Takehiko
> >>> >
> >>> >> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>> >> Hi YongKang,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> No, I doesn't try LTP on dom0 yet.
> >>> >> I will execute it now.
> >>> >> I will inform the result later.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks,
> >>> >> Fujita
> >>> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > From: You, Yongkang [mailto:yongkang.you@xxxxxxxxx]
> >>> >> > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 5:06 PM
> >>> >> > To: yo.fujita; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >> > Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd
week]
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Hi Fujita,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Did you try to run LTP and get the results in xen0 environment?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Best Regards,
> >>> >> > Yongkang (Kangkang) 永康
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > >-----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > >From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >> > >[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> >>> >> yo.fujita
> >>> >> > >Sent: 2006年3月10日 14:32
> >>> >> > >To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >> > >Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] Weekly benchmark results [3/2nd week]
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >Hi, all
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >I will inform this week's benchmark result.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >The tool used now is as follows.
> >>> >> > > - unixbench4.1.0
> >>> >> > > - bonnie++-1.03
> >>> >> > > - ltp-full-20051205
> >>> >> > > - iozone3_191
> >>> >> > > - lmbench-3.0-a5
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >TEST ENVIRONMENT
> >>> >> > > Machine : Tiger4
> >>> >> > > KERN : 2.6.16-rc5-xenU
> >>> >> > > changeset : 9157:a693ccb4d581
> >>> >> > > Dom0 OS : RHEL4 U2 (no SMP)
> >>> >> > > DomU OS : RHEL4 U2 (no SMP)
> >>> >> > > No. of DomU's : 1
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >SUMMARY:
> >>> >> > > - DomU came to do boot successfully!
> >>> >> > >issues:
> >>> >> > > -
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >TEST RESULT
> >>> >> > > unixbench4.1.0 : PASS
> >>> >> > > bonnie++-1.03 : PASS
> >>> >> > > ltp-full-20051205 : 51/816 FAIL (Please see the attached
files)
> >>> >> > > iozone3_191 : PASS
> >>> >> > > lmbench-3.0-a5 : PASS
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >Thanks and best regards,
> >>> >> > >Fujita and Fujitsu members
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
> >>> >> Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
> >>> Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
> >Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
Home