Re: avoid fc5 kernels > kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5 and < 1.2243

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

Hi,

On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 23:51 -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I just discovered today that recent fc5 kernel updates are basically the
> fc6 kernel rebuilt, including the utrace patch (and no doubt some
> intermediate buggy version to boot).  I've been recommending "the FC5
> kernel" as the stable reference kernel using the old pre-utrace ptrace.
> Recent updates are no good for that purpose and should be avoided.
> 
> kernel-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5 is the last fc5 updates rpm before the updates
> started including buggy utrace code.  For known-stable ptrace, please use
> that for now or an earlier kernel that worked for you (my workstation has
> been up for 41 days and it's running 2.6.17-1.2174_FC5).

Oops. I should have read and remembered this earlier. But just to
confirm that I am running 2.6.17-1.2174_FC5 now and on x86 it passes all
make check test. On x86_64 (multi-processor) there were 5 failures:

1)
testExecSyscall(frysk.proc.TestTaskSyscallObserver)junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: inSyscall

This seems to be because it is a multi-processor and our detection of
whether or not we are in a syscall is flawed.

2)
testMultiThreadedDetached(frysk.util.TestFStack)junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Task #5733
#0 0x3375d2f33f in __sigsuspend ()
[...]
did not match: (Task #\d+\n#0 0x[\da-f]+ in __kernel_vsyscall \(\)\n#1
[..]

3)
testMultiThreadedAckDaemon(frysk.util.TestFStack)junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: 4) testStressMultiThreadedDetach(frysk.util.TestFStack)junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: 5) testClone(frysk.util.TestFStack)junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: 

These seem to have checks which are too strict and match the call stack
as it is seen on x86, but not on x86_64. Is anyone else seeing these
pass or fail on something !x86?

Cheers,

Mark