Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764702AbXKOLjb (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 06:39:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753004AbXKOLjX (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 06:39:23 -0500 Received: from smtp107.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.217]:46447 "HELO smtp107.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751519AbXKOLjW (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2007 06:39:22 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=H+Ma/LQWu0IK4f8iEwDmtA45df7sZ9mxrp4CbxrizvrapuP3CLczDmj0elMzvoglFg/fBjwWaKF4v/Pf0SRBUlgiepH1OiquXz9yvnsPQiIhmINE5ZuxwhtgHnZoUSeKpV5UAtlS05y3YHEcH0xdJ6r/Oy8EdcPJZp8kM4ZLp8I= ; X-YMail-OSG: s4mFBqcVM1mZJQoUK12xPfZvWvAUkI62ZWfvygwj3kGceKYyCKRn.1AjI526Z4jnK7P_HmXZHw-- From: Nick Piggin To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [bug] SLOB crash, 2.6.24-rc2 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 22:39:14 +1100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: David Miller , mpm@selenic.com, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Thomas Gleixner References: <20071114225335.GV19691@waste.org> <200711152157.59409.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20071115112820.GA18228@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20071115112820.GA18228@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711152239.14707.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3200 Lines: 63 On Thursday 15 November 2007 22:28, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Nick Piggin wrote: > > Anyway, I'm really happy to see you're testing and using SLOB upstream > > > > :) Is there any particular reason that you're using it? > > i sometimes test SLOB for -rt, but this time it's the result of my > "automated random QA" effort, as part of arch/x86 maintainance/QA. > > the main trick is to build and booting random "make randconfig" > bzImages. That finds build bugs and a good deal of boot hang and crash > bugs as well. (it also found a compiler bug already) I can build and > boot about 1000 random kernels in 24 hours, and it's all fully > automated. I usually run it overnight - when a kernel does not come up > due to a bootup hang or crash (or the kernel log signals any exception > condition) then the script stops and i can fix it in the morning. > > The first step towards this was to get allyesconfig bzImage kernels to > build and boot fine. That effort took months (we had many problems in > this area) - i think you saw bugreports and fixes from me about that on > lkml. > > Once that worked reasonably well i made a small Kconfig patch that > forcibly selects a "minimum set" of drivers and kernel subsystems that > are needed to boot up a testsystem. Once a "make allnoconfig" and a > "make allyesconfig" bzImage kernel boots up fine on the testbox all > randconfig configs "inbetween" are supposed to build and boot fine as > well. > > I also have a patch that adds all the x86 boot options like nosmp, > maxcpus=1, nohz=off, hpet=disable to be selectable as .config options - > so those boot options are randomized as well. > > I also have a small patch that disables half a dozen drivers/features > that are not expected to work out of box in a bzImage kernel. (such as > ISA drivers that assume the presence of hardware, or root filesystem > features such as NFSROOT) > > the resulting make randconfig kernel still has 99% of the degrees of > freedom that a stock make randconfig kernel has, so by all practical > purposes it's a fully random kernel - it just happens to boot on my > testsystem all the time. > > A successful bootup means the test system is able to boot up into a > stock Fedora 8 userspace and is able to bring up its network interfaces > and ssh out (automatically) to the build box to signal the completion of > a successful test cycle. The logs are also analyzed for lockdep > assertions (if lockdep is enabled - which it is in about 20% of the > randconfig kernels) and other kernel bugs. > > (just in case you were wondering about one of the reasons why the > arch/x86 unification merge went so smoothly, with nary a regression ;-) > Thomas is doing other types of automated QA of the x86 queue as well.) Well, my hat's off to you. Actually I was more wondering how it is that you're catching SLOB bugs ;) so it seems your test setup is much more useful than just to test the x86 arch code... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/