| Message ID | eaf96617-2f3e-b573-8990-6e9e6b0cb6fd@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | resctrl selftest patches | expand |
Hi Shuah, On 4/10/2023 11:39 AM, Reinette Chatre wrote: > On 4/10/2023 11:25 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 4/10/23 10:43, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>> Hi Shuah and kselftest team, >>> >>> There are a couple of resctrl selftest patches that are ready for >>> inclusion. They have been percolating on the list for a while >>> without expecting more feedback. All have "Reviewed-by" tags from >>> at least one reviewer. Could you please consider including them >>> into the kselftest repo? There is one minor merge conflict between >>> two of the series for which the snippet below shows resolution. >>> [PATCH v8 0/6] Some improvements of resctrl selftest >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230215083230.3155897-1-tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com/ >>> >>> [PATCH v2 0/9] selftests/resctrl: Fixes to error handling logic and cleanups >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230215130605.31583-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com/ >>> >> >> I was waiting for another ack from x86, don't see one. > > I see. What are your expectations for resctrl patches to be considered > ready for inclusion? > >> I just applied them all. >> >> v9 patches are now in linux-kselftest next for Linux 6.4 >> > > Thank you very much for picking up Ilpo's series. > > Would you be ok to also pick up Shaopeng and Peter's contributions? > > These are the following (nothing new, just copied from previous email): > > [PATCH v8 0/6] Some improvements of resctrl selftest > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230215083230.3155897-1-tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com/ Shaopeng just sent a v9 with the only change being that it is rebased on top of kselftest's next branch. This leaves you with no merge conflicts to deal with: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230413072259.2089348-1-tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com/ Discussion surrounding this work completed a few months ago (it was ready before the resctrl selftest series you merged this week and a couple of the patches also carry your "Reviewed-by:"). I believe that it it ready for inclusion. Could you please consider including this work in the kselftest repo? > > [PATCH] selftests/resctrl: Use correct exit code when tests fail > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230309145757.2280518-1-peternewman@google.com/ This patch is also ready for inclusion and continues to apply cleanly. Thank you very much Reinette
On 4/13/23 09:53, Reinette Chatre wrote: il): >> >> [PATCH v8 0/6] Some improvements of resctrl selftest >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230215083230.3155897-1-tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com/ > > Shaopeng just sent a v9 with the only change being that it is rebased > on top of kselftest's next branch. This leaves you with no merge conflicts to > deal with: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230413072259.2089348-1-tan.shaopeng@jp.fujitsu.com/ > > Discussion surrounding this work completed a few months ago (it was ready before the > resctrl selftest series you merged this week and a couple of the patches also carry > your "Reviewed-by:"). I believe that it it ready for inclusion. Could you please > consider including this work in the kselftest repo? > >> >> [PATCH] selftests/resctrl: Use correct exit code when tests fail >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230309145757.2280518-1-peternewman@google.com/ > > This patch is also ready for inclusion and continues to apply cleanly. > > Thank you very much > All 7 patches are now in linux-kselftest next for Linux 6.4-rc1 thanks, -- Shuah
On 4/13/2023 10:36 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: > > All 7 patches are now in linux-kselftest next for Linux 6.4-rc1 > Thank you very much Shuah. Reinette
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c index 040ca1f9c173..775f9e542ff6 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/mbm_test.c @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static int mbm_setup(int num, ...) /* Run NUM_OF_RUNS times */ if (p->num_of_runs >= NUM_OF_RUNS) - return -1; + return END_OF_TESTS; /* Set up shemata with 100% allocation on the first run. */ if (p->num_of_runs == 0)