On 08/28/15 at 12:28pm, Phil Sutter wrote:
> After adding cond_resched() calls to threadfunc(), a surprisingly high
> rate of insert failures occurred probably due to table resizes getting a
> better chance to run in background. To not soften up the remaining
> tests, retry inserts until they either succeed or fail permanently.
>
> Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <p...@nwl.cc>
> ---
> lib/test_rhashtable.c | 13 +++++++------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/test_rhashtable.c b/lib/test_rhashtable.c
> index 63654e3..093cf84 100644
> --- a/lib/test_rhashtable.c
> +++ b/lib/test_rhashtable.c
> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static int thread_lookup_test(struct thread_data *tdata)
>
> static int threadfunc(void *data)
> {
> - int i, step, err = 0, insert_fails = 0;
> + int i, step, err = 0, retries = 0;
> struct thread_data *tdata = data;
>
> up(&prestart_sem);
> @@ -253,21 +253,22 @@ static int threadfunc(void *data)
>
> for (i = 0; i < entries; i++) {
> tdata->objs[i].value = (tdata->id << 16) | i;
> +insert_retry:
> cond_resched();
> err = rhashtable_insert_fast(&ht, &tdata->objs[i].node,
> test_rht_params);
> if (err == -ENOMEM || err == -EBUSY) {
> - tdata->objs[i].value = TEST_INSERT_FAIL;
> - insert_fails++;
> + retries++;
> + goto insert_retry;
Is it safe to retry indefinitely on ENOMEM? Retrying on EBUSY is
definitely an improvement and we should do the same in the non
threaded test as well.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
