Systemtap on ARM arch results summary

[David Long]

On 06/12/14 11:05, William Cohen wrote:

> Hi Naresh,
>
> Glad to hear that you got the tests up and running.  You mentioned that this a self hosted build of the kernel. It is pretty easy to compare the various armv7 testsuite runs on:
>
>   https://web.elastic.org/~dejazilla/viewsummary.php?_offset=0&_limit=20&_sort=1A&summary=&age=&rg=&tool=&variant=%3D%27armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf%27&versions=&pass=&fail=&kpass=&kfail=&xpass=&xfail=&untested=&unresolved=&unsupported=&warning=&error=
>
> I noticed there are some additional failure in your testsuite run.  335 vs 94.  Do you have uprobes turned on for the kernel?
>
> https://web.elastic.org/~dejazilla/viewrgdiff.php?rg1=382655&rg2=964991&_offset=0&_limit=10000&_offset=0&testcase=&r1=&r2=
>
>
> However, it looks like the tests on my arm chromebook were abbreviated due to a tcl error during the syscall.exp test, resulting in fewer total passes.
>
> -Will
>


Hi William,

There's several tests I had to disable in this run to prevent hangs. 
The more severe change is that I had to modify the *.exp files and the 
systemtap build to use "gcc -marm", as uprobes currently does not work 
for thumb and thumb is the default in the compiler.  Does your compiler 
default to generating ARM instructions, or how else did you overcome 
this problem for uprobes testing?

-dl