* results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot
@ 2007-05-16 2:10 William Cohen
2007-05-16 2:27 ` Vara Prasad
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: William Cohen @ 2007-05-16 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: SystemTAP
Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through and placed
PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten all of them.
-Will
fc7 i686
Date: 200705152038
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7PAE #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:04:52 EDT 2007 i686 i686
i386 GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(stap timeout)
FAIL: conversions.stp 0 (7)
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 318
# of unexpected failures 3
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 2
# of known failures 5
# of untested testcases 7
runtest completed at Tue May 15 18:56:21 2007
fc7 x86_64
ate: 200705142022
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7 #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:07:42 EDT 2007 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155
FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 340
# of unexpected failures 3
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 1
# of known failures 6
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 5
runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:20:39 2007
rhel4U5 686
crashed in Need to take a closer look on this one.
rhel4U5 x86_64
Date: 200705142049
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:36:54 EDT 2007 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR4510
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp shutdown (eof)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 343
# of unexpected failures 2
# of expected failures 130
# of known failures 7
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 5
runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:21 2007
rhel4U5 ia64
Date: 200705142051
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.EL #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:30:19 EDT 2007 ia64 ia64 ia64
GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.base/global_init.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert failure)
FAIL: probefunc:kernel.function("context_switch").inline compilation PR2436
FAIL: buildok/scsi.stp (elfutil assert failure)
FAIL: buildok/syscall.stp
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(pass1) (elfutil assert failure)
FAIL: systemtap.samples/tcptest.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
FAIL: conversions.stp 0xffffffffffffffff (6)
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert failure)
FAIL: 64-bit access PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit acct PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit alarm PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit chmod PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit clock PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit dir PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit forkwait PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit itimer PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit link PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit mmap PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit mount PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit net1 PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit openclose PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit readwrite PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit rt_signal PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit sendfile PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit stat PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit statfs PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit swap PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit sync PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit timer PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit trunc PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit uid PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit umask PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit unlink PR4471
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 280
# of unexpected failures 34
# of unexpected successes 2
# of expected failures 128
# of unknown successes 2
# of known failures 5
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 3
runtest completed at Mon May 14 18:17:55 2007
rhel5 i686
Date: 200705142049
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-8.1.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Feb 26 20:38:02 EST 2007 i686 i686
i386 GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.base/kfunct.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp shutdown (eof) (no probes fired)
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155 on nfs_check_flags()
FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout) (too long to build)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 315
# of unexpected failures 5
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 1
# of known failures 6
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 1
runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:19 2007
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot
2007-05-16 2:10 results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot William Cohen
@ 2007-05-16 2:27 ` Vara Prasad
2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
2007-05-17 14:44 ` results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 on 2.6.22-rc1 kernel William Cohen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vara Prasad @ 2007-05-16 2:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: William Cohen; +Cc: SystemTAP
William Cohen wrote:
> Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through
> and placed PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten all
> of them.
Hi Will,
Thanks for a wonderful job of covering so many OS versions and so many
platforms.
You are running against 2.6.21 with fedora patches (if any) where as PPC
tests seems to be running with 2.6.22-rc1 which is straight Linus
kernel, I don't know what Dave is running on s390. The only question I
have is can we at least have one run on an x86 platform with Linus
kernel so we have apples to apples comparison across all the major
platforms.
Thanks,
Vara Prasad
>
> -Will
>
> fc7 i686
> Date: 200705152038
> User: wcohen
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7PAE #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:04:52 EDT 2007
> i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(stap timeout)
> FAIL: conversions.stp 0 (7)
> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
> === systemtap Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 318
> # of unexpected failures 3
> # of expected failures 130
> # of unknown successes 2
> # of known failures 5
> # of untested testcases 7
> runtest completed at Tue May 15 18:56:21 2007
>
>
> fc7 x86_64
> ate: 200705142022
> User: wcohen
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7 #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:07:42 EDT 2007
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155
> FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
> === systemtap Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 340
> # of unexpected failures 3
> # of expected failures 130
> # of unknown successes 1
> # of known failures 6
> # of untested testcases 7
> # of unsupported tests 5
> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:20:39 2007
>
> rhel4U5 686
> crashed in Need to take a closer look on this one.
>
>
> rhel4U5 x86_64
> Date: 200705142049
> User: wcohen
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:36:54 EDT 2007
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR4510
> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp shutdown (eof)
> === systemtap Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 343
> # of unexpected failures 2
> # of expected failures 130
> # of known failures 7
> # of untested testcases 7
> # of unsupported tests 5
> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:21 2007
>
> rhel4U5 ia64
> Date: 200705142051
> User: wcohen
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.EL #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:30:19 EDT 2007 ia64
> ia64 ia64 GNU/Linux
>
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.base/global_init.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
> FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert
> failure)
> FAIL: probefunc:kernel.function("context_switch").inline
> compilation PR2436
> FAIL: buildok/scsi.stp (elfutil assert failure)
> FAIL: buildok/syscall.stp
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(pass1) (elfutil assert failure)
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/tcptest.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite
> problem?)
> FAIL: conversions.stp 0xffffffffffffffff (6)
> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert failure)
> FAIL: 64-bit access PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit acct PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit alarm PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit chmod PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit clock PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit dir PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit forkwait PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit itimer PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit link PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit mmap PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit mount PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit net1 PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit openclose PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit readwrite PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit rt_signal PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit sendfile PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit stat PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit statfs PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit swap PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit sync PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit timer PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit trunc PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit uid PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit umask PR4471
> FAIL: 64-bit unlink PR4471
> === systemtap Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 280
> # of unexpected failures 34
> # of unexpected successes 2
> # of expected failures 128
> # of unknown successes 2
> # of known failures 5
> # of untested testcases 7
> # of unsupported tests 3
> runtest completed at Mon May 14 18:17:55 2007
>
>
> rhel5 i686
> Date: 200705142049
> User: wcohen
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-8.1.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Feb 26 20:38:02 EST 2007
> i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.base/kfunct.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
> FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp shutdown (eof) (no probes fired)
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155 on
> nfs_check_flags()
> FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout) (too long to build)
> === systemtap Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 315
> # of unexpected failures 5
> # of expected failures 130
> # of unknown successes 1
> # of known failures 6
> # of untested testcases 7
> # of unsupported tests 1
> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:19 2007
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot
2007-05-16 2:27 ` Vara Prasad
@ 2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
2007-05-16 19:20 ` William Cohen
2007-05-17 5:58 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2007-05-17 14:44 ` results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 on 2.6.22-rc1 kernel William Cohen
1 sibling, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Wilder @ 2007-05-16 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vara Prasad; +Cc: William Cohen, SystemTAP
Vara Prasad wrote:
> William Cohen wrote:
>
>> Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through
>> and placed PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten
>> all of them.
>
>
> Hi Will,
>
> Thanks for a wonderful job of covering so many OS versions and so many
> platforms.
>
> You are running against 2.6.21 with fedora patches (if any) where as
> PPC tests seems to be running with 2.6.22-rc1 which is straight Linus
> kernel, I don't know what Dave is running on s390. The only question
> I have is can we at least have one run on an x86 platform with Linus
> kernel so we have apples to apples comparison across all the major
> platforms.
>
> Thanks,
> Vara Prasad
>
I am currently running 2.6.21-rc6-git5. It would be a good idea if we
all ran the same version (or close if possible) on all platforms. I
suggest we just stick to the current stable Linus kernel. But I am open
to suggestions. The current stable version is 2.4.21.1
>>
>> -Will
>>
>> fc7 i686
>> Date: 200705152038
>> User: wcohen
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7PAE #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:04:52 EDT 2007
>> i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(stap timeout)
>> FAIL: conversions.stp 0 (7)
>> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
>> === systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 318
>> # of unexpected failures 3
>> # of expected failures 130
>> # of unknown successes 2
>> # of known failures 5
>> # of untested testcases 7
>> runtest completed at Tue May 15 18:56:21 2007
>>
>>
>> fc7 x86_64
>> ate: 200705142022
>> User: wcohen
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-1.3142.fc7 #1 SMP Mon May 7 21:07:42 EDT 2007
>> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155
>> FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
>> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
>> === systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 340
>> # of unexpected failures 3
>> # of expected failures 130
>> # of unknown successes 1
>> # of known failures 6
>> # of untested testcases 7
>> # of unsupported tests 5
>> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:20:39 2007
>>
>> rhel4U5 686
>> crashed in Need to take a closer look on this one.
>>
>>
>> rhel4U5 x86_64
>> Date: 200705142049
>> User: wcohen
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.ELsmp #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:36:54 EDT 2007
>> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR4510
>> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp shutdown (eof) ===
>> systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 343
>> # of unexpected failures 2
>> # of expected failures 130
>> # of known failures 7
>> # of untested testcases 7
>> # of unsupported tests 5
>> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:21 2007
>>
>> rhel4U5 ia64
>> Date: 200705142051
>> User: wcohen
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.9-55.EL #1 SMP Fri Apr 20 16:30:19 EDT 2007 ia64
>> ia64 ia64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.base/global_init.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
>> FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert
>> failure)
>> FAIL: probefunc:kernel.function("context_switch").inline
>> compilation PR2436
>> FAIL: buildok/scsi.stp (elfutil assert failure)
>> FAIL: buildok/syscall.stp
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(pass1) (elfutil assert failure)
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/tcptest.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite
>> problem?)
>> FAIL: conversions.stp 0xffffffffffffffff (6)
>> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (eof) (elfutil assert
>> failure)
>> FAIL: 64-bit access PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit acct PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit alarm PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit chmod PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit clock PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit dir PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit forkwait PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit itimer PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit link PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit mmap PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit mount PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit net1 PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit openclose PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit readwrite PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit rt_signal PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit sendfile PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit stat PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit statfs PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit swap PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit sync PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit timer PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit trunc PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit uid PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit umask PR4471
>> FAIL: 64-bit unlink PR4471
>> === systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 280
>> # of unexpected failures 34
>> # of unexpected successes 2
>> # of expected failures 128
>> # of unknown successes 2
>> # of known failures 5
>> # of untested testcases 7
>> # of unsupported tests 3
>> runtest completed at Mon May 14 18:17:55 2007
>>
>>
>> rhel5 i686
>> Date: 200705142049
>> User: wcohen
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-8.1.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Feb 26 20:38:02 EST 2007
>> i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.base/kfunct.stp shutdown (eof) (testsuite problem?)
>> FAIL: systemtap.base/kmodule.stp shutdown (eof) (no probes fired)
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR1155 on
>> nfs_check_flags()
>> FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0)
>> FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout) (too long to build)
>> === systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes 315
>> # of unexpected failures 5
>> # of expected failures 130
>> # of unknown successes 1
>> # of known failures 6
>> # of untested testcases 7
>> # of unsupported tests 1
>> runtest completed at Mon May 14 17:42:19 2007
>>
>
>
--
David Wilder
IBM Linux Technology Center
Beaverton, Oregon, USA
dwilder@us.ibm.com
(503)578-3789
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot
2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
@ 2007-05-16 19:20 ` William Cohen
2007-05-17 5:58 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: William Cohen @ 2007-05-16 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Wilder; +Cc: Vara Prasad, SystemTAP
David Wilder wrote:
> Vara Prasad wrote:
>
>> William Cohen wrote:
>>
>>> Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through
>>> and placed PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten
>>> all of them.
>>
>>
>> Hi Will,
>>
>> Thanks for a wonderful job of covering so many OS versions and so many
>> platforms.
>>
>> You are running against 2.6.21 with fedora patches (if any) where as
>> PPC tests seems to be running with 2.6.22-rc1 which is straight Linus
>> kernel, I don't know what Dave is running on s390. The only question
>> I have is can we at least have one run on an x86 platform with Linus
>> kernel so we have apples to apples comparison across all the major
>> platforms.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vara Prasad
I am currently trying the 2.6.22-rc1 kernel. I have it built and tests running
on i686 machine.
I also built and installed it on x86_64. On the x86_64 I am seeing that things
are dying in __register_kprobe when the module attempts to install the probes.
Unfortunately this machine doesn't have serial port, so I will need to install
the kernel on an x86_64 machine with a serial port so I can get traceback.
> I am currently running 2.6.21-rc6-git5. It would be a good idea if we
> all ran the same version (or close if possible) on all platforms. I
> suggest we just stick to the current stable Linus kernel. But I am open
> to suggestions. The current stable version is 2.4.21.1
This also brings up the issue of configuration of the kernel the runtime does
take into account what is availble in the kernel, e.g. CONFIG_DEBUG_FS and
CONFIG_RELAY. Depending on configuration one kernel might work and another not.
-Will
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot
2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
2007-05-16 19:20 ` William Cohen
@ 2007-05-17 5:58 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli @ 2007-05-17 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Wilder; +Cc: Vara Prasad, William Cohen, SystemTAP
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:32:57PM -0700, David Wilder wrote:
> Vara Prasad wrote:
>
> >William Cohen wrote:
> >
> >>Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through
> >>and placed PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten
> >>all of them.
> >
> >
> >Hi Will,
> >
> >Thanks for a wonderful job of covering so many OS versions and so many
> >platforms.
> >
> >You are running against 2.6.21 with fedora patches (if any) where as
> >PPC tests seems to be running with 2.6.22-rc1 which is straight Linus
> >kernel, I don't know what Dave is running on s390. The only question
> >I have is can we at least have one run on an x86 platform with Linus
> >kernel so we have apples to apples comparison across all the major
> >platforms.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Vara Prasad
> >
> I am currently running 2.6.21-rc6-git5. It would be a good idea if we
> all ran the same version (or close if possible) on all platforms. I
> suggest we just stick to the current stable Linus kernel. But I am open
> to suggestions. The current stable version is 2.4.21.1
I think the agreement was to run the tests on the latest Linus' released
kernel. That'd make it 2.6.22-rc1 as of now.
Ananth
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 on 2.6.22-rc1 kernel
2007-05-16 2:27 ` Vara Prasad
2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
@ 2007-05-17 14:44 ` William Cohen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: William Cohen @ 2007-05-17 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vara Prasad; +Cc: SystemTAP
Vara Prasad wrote:
> William Cohen wrote:
>
>> Here are the test results from latest snapshot. I have gone through
>> and placed PR number on things that I know. sorry I haven't gotten all
>> of them.
>
> Hi Will,
>
> Thanks for a wonderful job of covering so many OS versions and so many
> platforms.
>
> You are running against 2.6.21 with fedora patches (if any) where as PPC
> tests seems to be running with 2.6.22-rc1 which is straight Linus
> kernel, I don't know what Dave is running on s390. The only question I
> have is can we at least have one run on an x86 platform with Linus
> kernel so we have apples to apples comparison across all the major
> platforms.
>
> Thanks,
> Vara Prasad
rawhide i686
Date: 200705161747
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-rc1 #1 SMP Wed May 16 12:29:40 EDT 2007 i686 i686 i386
GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: buildok/task_test.stp
task_struct has no member thread_info
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(stap timeout)
takes too long to build
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 318
# of unexpected failures 3
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 2
# of known failures 5
# of untested testcases 7
runtest completed at Wed May 16 16:22:23 2007
rhel4u5 (2.6.22-rc1) x86_64
Date: 200705162203
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-rc1 #2 SMP Wed May 16 17:27:51 EDT 2007 x86_64 x86_64
x86_64 GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: buildok/task_test.stp PR4500
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR4519
FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0) (testsuite problem?)
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 342
# of unexpected failures 3
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 1
# of known failures 6
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 5
runtest completed at Wed May 16 19:26:58 2007
rhel4u5 (2.6.22-rc1) ia64
Date: 200705162206
User: wcohen
Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-rc1 #2 SMP Wed May 16 16:50:03 EDT 2007 ia64 ia64 ia64
GNU/Linux
Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: buildok/syscall.stp PR4518
FAIL: buildok/task_test.stp PR4500
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error) PR4519
FAIL: transport fill staging buffer - relayfs (0) (test problem?)
FAIL: conversions.stp 0xffffffffffffffff (6)
FAIL: systemtap.stress/current.stp startup (timeout)
FAIL: 64-bit access PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit acct PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit alarm PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit chmod PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit clock PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit dir PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit forkwait PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit itimer PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit link PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit mmap PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit mount PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit net1 PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit openclose PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit readwrite PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit rt_signal PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit sendfile PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit stat PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit statfs PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit swap PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit sync PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit timer PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit trunc PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit uid PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit umask PR4471
FAIL: 64-bit unlink PR4471
=== systemtap Summary ===
# of expected passes 287
# of unexpected failures 31
# of expected failures 130
# of unknown successes 2
# of known failures 5
# of untested testcases 7
# of unsupported tests 3
runtest completed at Wed May 16 19:46:13 2007
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-05-17 14:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-05-16 2:10 results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 snapshot William Cohen
2007-05-16 2:27 ` Vara Prasad
2007-05-16 18:51 ` David Wilder
2007-05-16 19:20 ` William Cohen
2007-05-17 5:58 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2007-05-17 14:44 ` results of x86_64, i686, and ia64 testing on 20070512 on 2.6.22-rc1 kernel William Cohen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).