RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] LTP system call case alarm04 Failed in xen0.

["Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>]

Thanks, this is good information. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: You, Yongkang [mailto:yongkang.you@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 5:43 PM
> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins); 
> xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] LTP system call case alarm04 
> Failed in xen0.
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Sorry to reply you later. This case (alarm04) can pass in 
> IA32/IA32e/IA64(Native Linux), IA32/IA32e/IA64(Xen/VTx, VTi) 
> and IA32/IA32e (Xen/Xen0). It seemed only failed in 
> IA64(Xen/Xen0) environment. :(
> 
> Best Regards,
> Yongkang (Kangkang) æå
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
> >[mailto:dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx]
> >Sent: 2006å1æ21æ 1:13
> >To: You, Yongkang; xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] LTP system call case alarm04 
> Failed in xen0.
> >
> >Does anybody know if this test passes on Xen/x86?  How
> >about with Xen/VTx or Xen/VTi?  I wonder
> >if this is related to general issues with virtual time that
> >any virtualized system would see (even Vmware)?
> >
> >If this test passes with other virtualized systems but
> >not on Xen/ia64, we should definitely try to understand
> >why it fails.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Dan
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> >> Of You, Yongkang
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:33 PM
> >> To: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [Xen-ia64-devel] LTP system call case alarm04 
> Failed in xen0.
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I am now doing some testing on xen0 with LTP (Linux test project).
> >>
> >> I used the xen-ia64-unstable tree 8476. My CPU is Intel
> >> Montecito. My native and service OS Linux is RHEL4u2.The LTP
> >> which I used is the one of 2005-12-5.
> >>
> >> I have run the system call cases. Basically the testing
> >> result is good. There is only 1 case "alarm04" failed. This
> >> case can pass in the native Linux.
> >>
> >> The testing log show:
> >> sig_reg 1 FAIL : alarm() fails to send SIGALRM to execede process
> >>
> >> The latest LTP can be downloaded from
> >> http://ltp.sourceforge.net/ . Alarm04 code didn't change in
> >> the latest LTP changeset.
> >>
> >> Could somebody help to look at this issue? If need more
> >> information, please Let me know. I will send out other LTP
> >> failed issues here for you hunter bugs in the future.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Yongkang (Kangkang) æå
> >>
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel