WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ppc-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in

To: Xen-Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XenPPC-devel <xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests
From: Ewan Mellor <ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:55:22 +0100
Delivery-date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 03:55:45 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20061020032225.GQ27551@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <patchbomb.1161308910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20061020032225.GQ27551@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 01:22:31PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote:

> Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests.
> 
> Use the architecture specified idea of minimum memory.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> [Snip]
> 
> diff -r 69035d8a5f2a -r 2854ceda351e 
> tools/xm-test/tests/create/16_create_smallmem_neg.py
> --- a/tools/xm-test/tests/create/16_create_smallmem_neg.py    Thu Oct 19 
> 17:01:02 2006 +1000
> +++ b/tools/xm-test/tests/create/16_create_smallmem_neg.py    Thu Oct 19 
> 17:02:40 2006 +1000
> @@ -3,11 +3,11 @@
>  # Copyright (C) International Business Machines Corp., 2005
>  # Author: Dan Smith <danms@xxxxxxxxxx>
>  
> +import re
>  from XmTestLib import *
>  
> -# This is under the default lower limit of 32 and we expect this test
> -# to fail. 16MBs isn't enough for the -xen kernel.
> -MEM = 16
> +# Create a domaain without enough memory.
> +MEM = minSafeMem() - 1

I'm not convinced by this one.  Just because 32 MiB is known to be safe, that
doesn't mean that 31 MiB will cause the domain to crash.  The 16 MiB value is
deliberately _far_ too small, so that the OOM killer kicks in, and the console
runaway is detected.

I don't want this test to intermittently succeed, even if it is a negative
test -- it makes the results hard to analyse.

Is the 16 MiB value a problem for PPC, or were you deliberately trying to test
that 63 MiB failed on that platform?

We could add another arch-specific option -- tooLittleMem() or something -- or
we could just leave this value at 16 MiB.

Ewan.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel