Hi,
I prepared a merge request to update lava-test LTP test to the latest released version 20120401 [1]. However, the new LTP test suite hanged on creat08 and waitid02 tests when running on PandaBoard. Same tests don't hang and even pass successfully on Snowball. How do we proceed in this case?
off-topic question, why don't we provide an up-to-date LTP package from Overlay PPA instead of building LTP on device during the test?
Cheers,
Fathi [1] https://code.launchpad.net/~fboudra/lava-test/update-ltp-test-20120104
Hi
creat08 and other testcases which are using getgrnam("nobody") should have a fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup").
See ./testcases/kernel/syscalls/fchown/change_owner.c and
http://old.nabble.com/-LTP---PATCH--creat08%3A-fall-back-to-nogroup-if-nobod...
BR
/Chi Thu
On 2 April 2012 11:33, Fathi Boudra fathi.boudra@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
I prepared a merge request to update lava-test LTP test to the latest released version 20120401 [1]. However, the new LTP test suite hanged on creat08 and waitid02 tests when running on PandaBoard. Same tests don't hang and even pass successfully on Snowball. How do we proceed in this case?
off-topic question, why don't we provide an up-to-date LTP package from Overlay PPA instead of building LTP on device during the test?
Cheers,
Fathi [1] https://code.launchpad.net/~fboudra/lava-test/update-ltp-test-20120104
linaro-validation mailing list linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
On 2 April 2012 13:06, Le.chi Thu le.chi.thu@linaro.org wrote:
creat08 and other testcases which are using getgrnam("nobody") should have a fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup").
I used the same rootfs (nano) on both boards. nogroup is available on our images.
So for our image, all LTP test cases which use getgrnam("nobody") has to fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup") othervise those test cases will fail on our image.
/Chi Thu
On 2 April 2012 12:34, Fathi Boudra fathi.boudra@linaro.org wrote:
On 2 April 2012 13:06, Le.chi Thu le.chi.thu@linaro.org wrote:
creat08 and other testcases which are using getgrnam("nobody") should have a fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup").
I used the same rootfs (nano) on both boards. nogroup is available on our images.
W dniu 02.04.2012 14:00, Le.chi Thu pisze:
So for our image, all LTP test cases which use getgrnam("nobody") has to fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup") othervise those test cases will fail on our image.
Maybe that indicates our basic linux image is broken. Can we decide which part has to be fixed:
1) Ubuntu, because it deviates from some standard that mandates 'nobody' has to exist
2) LTP, because it incorrectly requires 'nobody' to be a valid group name.
Thanks ZK
On 2 April 2012 15:13, Zygmunt Krynicki zygmunt.krynicki@linaro.org wrote:
W dniu 02.04.2012 14:00, Le.chi Thu pisze:
So for our image, all LTP test cases which use getgrnam("nobody") has to fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup") othervise those test cases will fail on our image.
Maybe that indicates our basic linux image is broken. Can we decide which part has to be fixed:
- Ubuntu, because it deviates from some standard that mandates 'nobody'
has to exist
- LTP, because it incorrectly requires 'nobody' to be a valid group name.
LTP should fall back on nogroup when nobody isn't available. It need to be confirmed, code isn't bug free... LTP comes also with a script to check users/groups needed to run the tests themselves. If the script works, we should run to make sure pre-requisites to run the tests are met.
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Fathi Boudra fathi.boudra@linaro.orgwrote:
On 2 April 2012 15:13, Zygmunt Krynicki zygmunt.krynicki@linaro.org wrote:
W dniu 02.04.2012 14:00, Le.chi Thu pisze:
So for our image, all LTP test cases which use getgrnam("nobody") has to fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup") othervise those test cases will fail on our image.
Maybe that indicates our basic linux image is broken. Can we decide which part has to be fixed:
- Ubuntu, because it deviates from some standard that mandates 'nobody'
has to exist
- LTP, because it incorrectly requires 'nobody' to be a valid group
name.
LTP should fall back on nogroup when nobody isn't available. It need to be confirmed, code isn't bug free... LTP comes also with a script to check users/groups needed to run the tests themselves. If the script works, we should run to make sure pre-requisites to run the tests are met.
Right, clearly some tests need a known user/group to exist in order to run properly. There was discussion in ltp once upon a time of creating an ltp user and group for testing this, but people didn't like it creating this user on their system. So, at the time, it was really rare to not have a nobody user and group, and a script was added to create them if they didn't exist (optionally) or warn you if you chose to skip this step to expect that some tests would fail.
-Paul Larson
On 2 April 2012 15:00, Le.chi Thu le.chi.thu@linaro.org wrote:
So for our image, all LTP test cases which use getgrnam("nobody") has to fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup") othervise those test cases will fail on our image.
exact.
On 2 April 2012 12:34, Fathi Boudra fathi.boudra@linaro.org wrote:
On 2 April 2012 13:06, Le.chi Thu le.chi.thu@linaro.org wrote:
creat08 and other testcases which are using getgrnam("nobody") should have a fall-back to getgrnam("nogroup").
I used the same rootfs (nano) on both boards. nogroup is available on our images.
linaro-validation@lists.linaro.org
-
Fathi Boudra -
Le.chi Thu -
Paul Larson -
Zygmunt Krynicki