Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Srinivasa Ds]

Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
==============================================
Date: 200704300942
User: root
Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
ppc64 GNU/Linux

Testsuite summary of failed tests
FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)
FAIL: 64-bit mmap                      (PR 4088)
FAIL: 64-bit readwrite
FAIL: 64-bit signal
FAIL: 64-bit statfs
FAIL: 32-bit alarm                      (PR 4332)
FAIL: 32-bit clock                      (PR 4332)
FAIL: 32-bit mmap                       (PR 4088)
FAIL: 32-bit readwrite
FAIL: 32-bit signal                      (PR 4332)
FAIL: 32-bit stat                        (PR 4332)
FAIL: 32-bit statfs                      (PR 4332)
                === systemtap Summary ===

# of expected passes            335
# of unexpected failures        13
# of expected failures          129
# of unknown successes          2
# of known failures             5
# of untested testcases         7
# of unsupported tests          2
runtest completed at Mon Apr 30 17:23:12 2007
======================================================================

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Jim Keniston]

On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 17:41 +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
> Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
> ==============================================
> Date: 200704300942
> User: root
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
> ppc64 GNU/Linux
> 
> Testsuite summary of failed tests
> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
> FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)

Thanks for the report.  Are you sure 3429 is the right bug number?  It
was marked fixed in January.  If this is really the bug you're seeing,
you should either re-open it and annotate it with a description of what
you're seeing, or submit a new problem report.

Jim

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[William Cohen]

Jim Keniston wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 17:41 +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
>> Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
>> ==============================================
>> Date: 200704300942
>> User: root
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
>> ppc64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
>> FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)
> 
> Thanks for the report.  Are you sure 3429 is the right bug number?  It
> was marked fixed in January.  If this is really the bug you're seeing,
> you should either re-open it and annotate it with a description of what
> you're seeing, or submit a new problem report.
> 
> Jim
> 

Maybe 4329, "systemtap.samples/sysopen test fails on several arch's"?

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Vara Prasad]

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your help in running the weekly tests and posting the results.

Srinivasa Ds wrote:

>Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
>==============================================
>Date: 200704300942
>User: root
>Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
>ppc64 GNU/Linux
>
>Testsuite summary of failed tests
>FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
>FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)
>FAIL: 64-bit mmap                      (PR 4088)
>FAIL: 64-bit readwrite
>FAIL: 64-bit signal
>FAIL: 64-bit statfs
>  
>
Do you have a bug no. for the above 64bit failures?

>FAIL: 32-bit alarm                      (PR 4332)
>FAIL: 32-bit clock                      (PR 4332)
>FAIL: 32-bit mmap                       (PR 4088)
>FAIL: 32-bit readwrite
>  
>
Any ideas of why above readwrite test is failing?

>FAIL: 32-bit signal                      (PR 4332)
>FAIL: 32-bit stat                        (PR 4332)
>FAIL: 32-bit statfs                      (PR 4332)
>                === systemtap Summary ===
>
># of expected passes            335
># of unexpected failures        13
># of expected failures          129
># of unknown successes          2
># of known failures             5
># of untested testcases         7
># of unsupported tests          2
>runtest completed at Mon Apr 30 17:23:12 2007
>======================================================================
>  
>
bye,
Vara Prasad

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Srinivasa Ds]

Jim Keniston wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 17:41 +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
>> Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
>> ==============================================
>> Date: 200704300942
>> User: root
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
>> ppc64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
>> FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)
> 
> Thanks for the report.  Are you sure 3429 is the right bug number?


Iam sorry, That was a typo. Bug number is 4329. I have found out the
reason for the bug and proposed the solution in the bugzilla. So this
might get fixed in  next 2 or 3 days.


  It
> was marked fixed in January.  If this is really the bug you're seeing,
> you should either re-open it and annotate it with a description of what
> you're seeing, or submit a new problem report.
> 
> Jim
> 

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Srinivasa Ds]

Vara Prasad wrote:
> Hi Srini,
> 
> Thanks for your help in running the weekly tests and posting the results.
> 
> Srinivasa Ds wrote:
> 
>> Results of systemtap-20070428 snapshot on ppc64
>> ==============================================
>> Date: 200704300942
>> User: root
>> Kernel: Linux 2.6.21-rc7 #5 SMP Mon Apr 23 09:48:27 IST 2007 ppc64 ppc64
>> ppc64 GNU/Linux
>>
>> Testsuite summary of failed tests
>> FAIL: systemtap.samples/lket(semantic error)
>> FAIL: sysopen (1)                      (PR 3429)
>> FAIL: 64-bit mmap                      (PR 4088)
>> FAIL: 64-bit readwrite
>> FAIL: 64-bit signal
>> FAIL: 64-bit statfs
>>  
>>
> Do you have a bug no. for the above 64bit failures?

We are investigating on errors.Most of the failures are due to
difference in actual and expected strings(Expected strings suits 32-bit
systems and not 64-bit systems)

For ex:-  in statfs test
==============================
Actual: statfs: ustat (42, 0x0000000012345678) = -22 (EINVAL)
statfs: statfs ("abc", 0x0000000012345678) = -2 (ENOENT)
statfs: fstatfs (77, 0x0000000012345678) = -9 (EBADF)
statfs: exit_group (0) =
  statfs: exit (0) =
--------- EXPECTED and NOT MATCHED ----------
statfs: ustat \(42, 0x12345678\) =
statfs: statfs \("abc", 0x12345678\) =
statfs: fstatfs \(77, 0x12345678\) =
========================================

Discussed in detail in bug#4444.


> 
>> FAIL: 32-bit alarm                      (PR 4332)
>> FAIL: 32-bit clock                      (PR 4332)
>> FAIL: 32-bit mmap                       (PR 4088)
>> FAIL: 32-bit readwrite
>>  
>>
> Any ideas of why above readwrite test is failing?

readwrite is failing because of difference expected and actual file
descriptor displayed by readv and wirtev.
==================================================
readwrite: writev (unknown fd, 0x00000000ff97f794, 3) = 15
readwrite: lseek (4, 0, SEEK_SET) = 0
readwrite: lseek (4, 1, SEEK_CUR) = 1
readwrite: lseek (4, -1, SEEK_END) = 75
readwrite: close (4) = 0
readwrite: open ("foobar1", O_RDONLY) = 4
readwrite: read (4, 0x00000000ff97f7c4, 11) = 11
readwrite: read (4, 0x00000000ff97f7c4, 50) = 50
readwrite: readv (unknown fd, 0x00000000ff97f7ac, 3) = 15
readwrite: close (4) = 0
readwrite: exit_group (0) =
  readwrite: exit (0) =
--------- EXPECTED and NOT MATCHED ----------
readwrite: writev \(4, [x0-9a-fA-F]+, 3\) = 15
readwrite: lseek \(4, 0, SEEK_SET\) = 0
readwrite: lseek \(4, 1, SEEK_CUR\) = 1
readwrite: lseek \(4, -1, SEEK_END\) = 75
readwrite: open \("foobar1", O_RDONLY\) = 4
readwrite: read \(4, [x0-9a-fA-F]+, 11\) = 11
readwrite: read \(4, [x0-9a-fA-F]+, 50\) = 50
readwrite: readv \(4, [x0-9a-fA-F]+, 3\) = 15
=====================================================

> 
>> FAIL: 32-bit signal                      (PR 4332)
>> FAIL: 32-bit stat                        (PR 4332)
>> FAIL: 32-bit statfs                      (PR 4332)
>>                === systemtap Summary ===
>>
>> # of expected passes            335
>> # of unexpected failures        13
>> # of expected failures          129
>> # of unknown successes          2
>> # of known failures             5
>> # of untested testcases         7
>> # of unsupported tests          2
>> runtest completed at Mon Apr 30 17:23:12 2007
>> ======================================================================
>>  
>>
> bye,
> Vara Prasad
> 

Re: Results of 20070428 snapshot on ppc64

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Srinivasa Ds <srinivasa@in.ibm.com> writes:

> [...]  Iam sorry, That was a typo. Bug number is 4329. I have found
> out the reason for the bug and proposed the solution in the
> bugzilla. So this might get fixed in next 2 or 3 days.  [...]

By the way, if you find simple problems like this, and can come up
with an uncontroversial patch, feel free to just commit it straight to
CVS and mention it in the mailing list.  All the formality and delay
of bugzilla buck-passing may not be always justified.

- FChE