This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [SYSTEMTAP/PATCH v2 0/6] RT aware systemtap patch set


Some update on regression -rt stap test that It looks like I fixed
most of deadlock specific bugs in stap specific -rt mode.. with
obvious addition of more -rt stap patch to show up in v3 version
soon.. Running one last time regression stuff with more load on 12
core Ivybridge machine before flashing the patches.

Thanks Frank for autotest pointers.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> wrote:
> Frank suggested me to run "make installcheck" on -rt and not-rt mode
> which I tried and got build failure saying "./execrc: line 4: runtest:
> command not found". Anyone knows how to fix this.
>
> I am building/testing vanilla kernel version 3.14.12-rt9 on x86
> Ivybridge box [12 cores HT].
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:10 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> [...]  This is a v2 version of -rt aware systemtap patchset, tested
>>>> for 3.14.12-rt9 and for 3.10.40-rt38 kernel version. [...]
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>> Test script used for testing :
>>>> /usr/local/stap/bin/stap -v testsuite/systemtap.examples/network/netdev.stp
>>>> /usr/local/stap/bin/stap -v testsuite/systemtap.examples/network/tcpdumplike.stp
>>>> [...]
>>>> Like know feedback, comment on patch set. also Does it make sense to maintain
>>>> systemtap -rt version in upstream.. do we care?
>>>
>>> Thanks to Josh for looking into this in more detail.  I only have the
>>> general observation that this patchset would be desirable in mainline
>>> stap, but only if it is tested by at least the whole testsuite (rather
>>> than just those two samples) on your -rt kernel, *and* if the patched
>>> code also runs the whole testsuite on a non-rt kernel.  (We don't
>>> expect 100% PASS, but also no smoke attributable to the patches.)
>>>
>>
>> Agree, Could you point me testsuite to trigger and test.. I looked
>> perhaps not so much keenly.. so it would be good to know right
>> pointers about testing details .. I can run test and present the
>> report. let me know. Also Any performance specific testsuite too? I
>> did asked for in v1 patchset.
>> Thanks.
>>> - FChE


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]