Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-08-07 Thread Fengguang Wu
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 09:29:33AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 07:57 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > > > What was the next lines? I bet you it was "PASSED". Which means it did > > > not fail. This is the second bug you found that has to do with RCU being > > > called in

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-08-07 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 07:57 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > What was the next lines? I bet you it was "PASSED". Which means it did > > not fail. This is the second bug you found that has to do with RCU being > > called in 'idle'. The one that Paul posted a patch for. > > Yeah, PASSED! I have

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:09:38PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 16:57 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > What was the next lines? I bet you it was "PASSED". Which means it did > > > not fail. This is the second bug you found that has to do with RCU being > > > called in

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 16:57 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > What was the next lines? I bet you it was "PASSED". Which means it did > > not fail. This is the second bug you found that has to do with RCU being > > called in 'idle'. The one that Paul posted a patch for. > > Though it needs anothe

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Fengguang Wu
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 07:51:39PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 07:43 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:13:39AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:50 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrot

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 07:51:39PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 07:43 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:13:39AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:50 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrot

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 07:43 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:13:39AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:50 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > That would be better. A hypervisor might be real-time cap

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Fengguang Wu
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:13:39AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:50 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > That would be better. A hypervisor might be real-time capable (with > > some effort kvm can do this), so we don't want to

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:50 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > That would be better. A hypervisor might be real-time capable (with > some effort kvm can do this), so we don't want to turn off real time > features just based on that. It would only turn off

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Avi Kivity
On 07/31/2012 03:43 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:37 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 07/31/2012 03:17 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote: >> > >> > It's good to quickly get to the root cause :) Can we possibly detect >> > whether we are in a virtual machine and hence skip this particular

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 15:37 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/31/2012 03:17 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > It's good to quickly get to the root cause :) Can we possibly detect > > whether we are in a virtual machine and hence skip this particular > > test case? > > cpu_has(&boot_cpu, X86_FEATURE_

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Avi Kivity
On 07/31/2012 03:17 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > It's good to quickly get to the root cause :) Can we possibly detect > whether we are in a virtual machine and hence skip this particular > test case? cpu_has(&boot_cpu, X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-31 Thread Fengguang Wu
[CC kvm developers] On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:45:05AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 17:07 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 05:03:30PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > And this warning shows up in one of the dozens of boots, for the same > > kconfig. >

Re: Testing tracer wakeup_rt: .. no entries found ..FAILED!

2012-07-30 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 17:07 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 05:03:30PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > And this warning shows up in one of the dozens of boots, for the same > kconfig. > > [2.320434] Testing tracer wakeup: PASSED > [2.840288] Testing tracer wakeup_rt: ..