December 2019 - Linux-kselftest-mirror

Reply expected within the next 48 hours.

by Charles

Hello and good day, My name is Charles, and I am contacting you to know first and foremost, if your private or company bank account in Japan or elsewhere can receive a total of 15 Million US Dollars (Approximately 1.6 Billion JP¥) at the shortest notice? If yes, then kindly reply for further and complete details. Expecting your reply as soon as possible because we have limited time to have this fund in your nominated bank account. Doumo Arigatou. Charles Renfroe. Toronto-Canada

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH 0/6] Fix nits in the kunit

by SeongJae Park

From: SeongJae Park <sjpark(a)amazon.de> This patchset contains trivial fixes for the kunit documentations and the wrapper python scripts. SeongJae Park (6): docs/kunit/start: Use in-tree 'kunit_defconfig' docs/kunit/start: Skip wrapper run command kunit: Remove duplicated defconfig creation kunit: Create default config in 'build_dir' kunit: Place 'test.log' under the 'build_dir' kunit: Rename 'kunitconfig' to '.kunitconfig' Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst | 19 +++++-------------- tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py | 10 ++++++---- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 6 +++--- 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) -- 2.7.4

4 years, 5 months

3
22
0 0

[PATCH v2 0/5] Fix nits in the kunit

by SeongJae Park

This patchset contains trivial fixes for the kunit documentations and the wrapper python scripts. Changes from v1 (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/1575242724-4937-1-git-send-email-sj38.par…): - Remove "docs/kunit/start: Skip wrapper run command" (A similar approach is ongoing) - Make 'build_dir' if not exists SeongJae Park (5): docs/kunit/start: Use in-tree 'kunit_defconfig' kunit: Remove duplicated defconfig creation kunit: Create default config in '--build_dir' kunit: Place 'test.log' under the 'build_dir' kunit: Rename 'kunitconfig' to '.kunitconfig' Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/start.rst | 13 +++++-------- tools/testing/kunit/kunit.py | 14 ++++++++------ tools/testing/kunit/kunit_kernel.py | 8 ++++---- 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) -- 2.7.4

4 years, 5 months

2
6
0 0

[PATCH kselftest-next 1/2] kselftests: memcg: update the oom group leaf events test

by Roman Gushchin

Commit 9852ae3fe529 ("mm, memcg: consider subtrees in memory.events") made memory.events recursive: all events are propagated upwards by the tree. It was a change in semantics. It broke the oom group leaf events test: it assumes that after an OOM the oom_kill counter is zero on parent's level. Let's adjust the test: it should have similar expectations for the child and parent levels. The test passes after this fix. Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro(a)fb.com> Cc: Chris Down <chris(a)chrisdown.name> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes(a)cmpxchg.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c index c19a97dd02d4..60bfe53c0289 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_memcontrol.c @@ -1002,7 +1002,8 @@ static int test_memcg_sock(const char *root) /* * This test disables swapping and tries to allocate anonymous memory * up to OOM with memory.group.oom set. Then it checks that all - * processes in the leaf (but not the parent) were killed. + * processes in the leaf were killed. It also checks that oom_events + * were propagated to the parent level. */ static int test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events(const char *root) { @@ -1045,7 +1046,7 @@ static int test_memcg_oom_group_leaf_events(const char *root) if (cg_read_key_long(child, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") <= 0) goto cleanup; - if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") != 0) + if (cg_read_key_long(parent, "memory.events", "oom_kill ") <= 0) goto cleanup; ret = KSFT_PASS; -- 2.17.1

4 years, 5 months

2
3
0 0

Hope to get your reply within 48 hours

by Charles

Hello and good day, My name is Charles, and I am contacting you to know first and foremost, if your private or company bank account in Japan or elsewhere can receive a total of 15 Million US Dollars (Approximately 1.6 Billion JP¥) at the shortest notice? If yes, then kindly reply for further and complete details. Expecting your reply as soon as possible because we have limited time to have this fund in your nominated bank account. Doumo Arigatou. Charles Renfroe. Toronto-Canada

4 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v2] kunit: testing kunit: Bug fix in test_run_timeout function

by Heidi Fahim

Assert in test_run_timeout was not updated with the build_dir argument and caused the following error: AssertionError: Expected call: run_kernel(timeout=3453) Actual call: run_kernel(build_dir=None, timeout=3453) Needed to update kunit_tool_test to reflect this fix https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/6/351 Signed-off-by: Heidi Fahim <heidifahim(a)google.com> Reviewed-by: SeongJae Park <sjpark(a)amazon.de> --- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index 4a12baa0cd4e..a2a8ea6beae3 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ class KUnitMainTest(unittest.TestCase): timeout = 3453 kunit.main(['run', '--timeout', str(timeout)], self.linux_source_mock) assert self.linux_source_mock.build_reconfig.call_count == 1 - self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.assert_called_once_with(timeout=timeout) + self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.assert_called_once_with(build_dir=None, timeout=timeout) self.print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('Testing complete.')) if __name__ == '__main__': -- 2.24.0.393.g34dc348eaf-goog

4 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

[GIT PULL] Kselftest fixes2 update for Linux 5.5.rc1

by Shuah Khan

Hi Linus, Please pull this second Kselftest fixes update for Linux 5.5-rc1. This second Kselftest fixes update for Linux 5.5-rc1 consists of an urgent revert to fix regression in CI coverage. diff is attached. thanks, -- Shuah ---------------------------------------------------------------- The following changes since commit ed2d8fa734e7759ac3788a19f308d3243d0eb164: selftests: sync: Fix cast warnings on arm (2019-11-07 14:54:37 -0700) are available in the Git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest tags/linux-kselftest-5.5-rc1-fixes2 for you to fetch changes up to f60b85e83659b5fbd3eb2c8f68d33ef4e35ebb2c: Revert "selftests: Fix O= and KBUILD_OUTPUT handling for relative paths" (2019-11-28 16:27:44 -0700) ---------------------------------------------------------------- linux-kselftest-5.5-rc1-fixes2 This second Kselftest fixes update for Linux 5.5-rc1 consists of an urgent revert to fix regression in CI coverage. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shuah Khan (1): Revert "selftests: Fix O= and KBUILD_OUTPUT handling for relative paths" tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) ----------------------------------------------------------------

4 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

[PATCH] kunit: testing kunit: Bug fix in test_run_timeout function

by Heidi Fahim

Assert in test_run_timeout was not updated with the build_dir argument and caused the following error: AssertionError: Expected call: run_kernel(timeout=3453) Actual call: run_kernel(build_dir=None, timeout=3453) Needed to update kunit_tool_test to reflect this fix https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/6/3 Signed-off-by: Heidi Fahim <heidifahim(a)google.com> Change-Id: I6f161c72c6a5f071a4dc31582ba08b91974502ce --- tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py index 4a12baa0cd4e..a2a8ea6beae3 100755 --- a/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py +++ b/tools/testing/kunit/kunit_tool_test.py @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ class KUnitMainTest(unittest.TestCase): timeout = 3453 kunit.main(['run', '--timeout', str(timeout)], self.linux_source_mock) assert self.linux_source_mock.build_reconfig.call_count == 1 - self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.assert_called_once_with(timeout=timeout) + self.linux_source_mock.run_kernel.assert_called_once_with(build_dir=None, timeout=timeout) self.print_mock.assert_any_call(StrContains('Testing complete.')) if __name__ == '__main__': -- 2.24.0.432.g9d3f5f5b63-goog

4 years, 5 months

3
3
0 0

[PATCH v4 0/4] PM / QoS: Restore DEV_PM_QOS_MIN/MAX_FREQUENCY

by Leonard Crestez

Support for frequency limits in dev_pm_qos was removed when cpufreq was switched to freq_qos, this series attempts to restore it by reimplementing on top of freq_qos. Discussion about removal is here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/VI1PR04MB7023DF47D046AEADB4E051EBEE680@VI1… The cpufreq core switched away because it needs contraints at the level of a "cpufreq_policy" which cover multiple cpus so dev_pm_qos coupling to struct device was not useful. Cpufreq could only use dev_pm_qos by implementing an additional layer of aggregation anyway. However in the devfreq subsystem scaling is always performed on a per-device basis so dev_pm_qos is a very good match. Support for dev_pm_qos in devfreq core is here (latest version, no dependencies outside this series): https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11252409/ That series is RFC mostly because it needs these PM core patches. Earlier versions got entangled in some locking cleanups but those are not strictly necessary to get dev_pm_qos functionality. In theory if freq_qos is extended to handle conflicting min/max values then this sharing would be valuable. Right now freq_qos just ties two unrelated pm_qos aggregations for min and max freq. --- This is implemented by embeding a freq_qos_request inside dev_pm_qos_request: the data field was already an union in order to deal with flag requests. The internal freq_qos_apply is exported so that it can be called from dev_pm_qos apply_constraints. The dev_pm_qos_constraints_destroy function has no obvious equivalent in freq_qos and the whole approach of "removing requests" is somewhat dubios: request objects should be owned by consumers and the list of qos requests will most likely be empty when the target device is deleted. Series follows current pattern for dev_pm_qos. First two patches can be applied separately. Changes since v3: * Fix s/QOS/QoS in patch 2 title * Improves comments in kunit test * Fix assertions after freq_qos_remove_request * Remove (c) from NXP copyright header * Wrap long lines in qos.c to be under 80 chars. This fixes checkpatch but the rule is already broken by code in the files. * Collect reviews Link to v3: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11260627/ Changes since v2: * #define PM_QOS_MAX_FREQUENCY_DEFAULT_VALUE FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE * #define FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE S32_MAX (in new patch) * Add initial kunit test for freq_qos, validating the MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE found by Matthias and another recent fix. Testing this should be easier! Link to v2: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11250413/ Changes since v1: * Don't rename or EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL the freq_qos_apply function; just drop the static marker. Link to v1: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11212887/ Leonard Crestez (4): PM / QoS: Initial kunit test PM / QoS: Redefine FREQ_QOS_MAX_DEFAULT_VALUE to S32_MAX PM / QoS: Reorder pm_qos/freq_qos/dev_pm_qos structs PM / QoS: Restore DEV_PM_QOS_MIN/MAX_FREQUENCY drivers/base/Kconfig | 4 ++ drivers/base/power/Makefile | 1 + drivers/base/power/qos-test.c | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/base/power/qos.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++-- include/linux/pm_qos.h | 86 ++++++++++++++----------- kernel/power/qos.c | 4 +- 6 files changed, 242 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/base/power/qos-test.c -- 2.17.1

4 years, 5 months

5
12
0 0

[PATCH] fs/ext4/inode-test: Fix inode test on 32 bit platforms.

by Iurii Zaikin

Fixes the issue caused by the fact that in C in the expression of the form -1234L only 1234L is the actual literal, the unary minus is an operation applied to the literal. Which means that to express the lower bound for the type one has to negate the upper bound and subtract 1. Original error: Expected test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == timestamp.tv_sec, but test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == -2147483648 timestamp.tv_sec == 2147483648 1901-12-13 Lower bound of 32bit < 0 timestamp, no extra bits: msb:1 lower_bound:1 extra_bits: 0 Expected test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == timestamp.tv_sec, but test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == 2147483648 timestamp.tv_sec == 6442450944 2038-01-19 Lower bound of 32bit <0 timestamp, lo extra sec bit on: msb:1 lower_bound:1 extra_bits: 1 Expected test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == timestamp.tv_sec, but test_data[i].expected.tv_sec == 6442450944 timestamp.tv_sec == 10737418240 2174-02-25 Lower bound of 32bit <0 timestamp, hi extra sec bit on: msb:1 lower_bound:1 extra_bits: 2 not ok 1 - inode_test_xtimestamp_decoding not ok 1 - ext4_inode_test Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert(a)linux-m68k.org> Signed-off-by: Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin(a)google.com> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert(a)linux-m68k.org> --- fs/ext4/inode-test.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c index 92a9da1774aa..bbce1c328d85 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/inode-test.c +++ b/fs/ext4/inode-test.c @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ * For constructing the negative timestamp lower bound value. * binary: 10000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 */ -#define LOWER_MSB_1 (-0x80000000L) +#define LOWER_MSB_1 (-(UPPER_MSB_0) - 1L) /* avoid overflow */ /* * For constructing the negative timestamp upper bound value. * binary: 11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 -- 2.24.0.432.g9d3f5f5b63-goog

4 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Linux-kselftest-mirror December 2019