lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] s390 vs. kprobes on ftrace
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:49:56PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> I'm not sure about s390 nor have the machine, so it is very helpful if you
> give us a command line level test and show us the result with this patch :)
> Fortunately, we already have ftracetest under tools/tesitng/selftest/ftrace/.
> You can add the testcase for checking co-existence of kprobes and ftrace on
> an entry of a function.

FWIW, I was also surprised to see that the order of the ftrace testcases is
not sorted. Maybe you might consider the patch below as well:

From a659098f63f188e603316e4c4ccb435bf360987a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:08:35 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ftracetest: sort testcases

Make sure the order of the executed testcases is always the same.

Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest
index a8f81c782856..2007a2cde56f 100755
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ abspath() {
}

find_testcases() { #directory
- echo `find $1 -name \*.tc`
+ echo `find $1 -name \*.tc | sort`
}

parse_opts() { # opts
--
1.8.5.5


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-17 10:41    [W:0.146 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site