please ignore -- I see that I changed the wrong place...
On Oct 29, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Eric Norum wrote:
> No joy:
>
> === modified file 'src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c'
> --- src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c 2010-10-05 19:27:37 +0000
> +++ src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c 2010-10-29 16:00:56 +0000
> @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@
> epicsThreadGetStackSize(epicsThreadStackSmall),
> onceThread, 0);
> }
> - epicsThreadSleep(0.1);
> + epicsThreadSleep(1.0);
>
> testOk(runCount == NUM_ONCE_THREADS, "runCount = %d", runCount);
> epicsEventSignal(go);
>
>
>
> ***** epicsThreadOnceTest *****
> 1..11
> ok 1 - runCount = 8
> ok 2 - once-0: initCount = 1
> ok 3 - once-1: initCount = 1
> ok 4 - once-2: initCount = 1
> ok 5 - once-3: initCount = 1
> ok 6 - once-4: initCount = 1
> not ok 7 - doneCount = 4
> ok 8 - once-5: initCount = 1
> # init was run by once-0
> ok 9 - once-6: initCount = 1
> Recursive epicsThreadOnce() initialization
> ok 10 - once-7: initCount = 1
> Thread recurse (0xa010018) can't proceed, suspending.
> ok 11 - Recursive epicsThreadOnce() detected
>
> Results
> =======
> Tests: 11
> Passed: 10 = 90.91%
> Failed: 1 = 9.09%
>
>
>
> On Oct 29, 2010, at 8:45 AM, Andrew Johnson wrote:
>
>> On Friday 29 October 2010 10:24:18 Eric Norum wrote:
>>> So can we fix this somehow? I don't like seeing failure rates greater
>>> than 0.0%. I'm sure that others running the tests will also be confused
>>> by this, too.
>>
>> Try this:
>>
>> === modified file 'src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c'
>> --- src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c 2010-10-05 19:27:37 +0000
>> +++ src/libCom/test/epicsThreadOnceTest.c 2010-10-29 15:43:59 +0000
>> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@
>>
>> testOk(runCount == NUM_ONCE_THREADS, "runCount = %d", runCount);
>> epicsEventSignal(go);
>> - epicsThreadSleep(0.1);
>> + epicsThreadSleep(1.0);
>>
>> testOk(doneCount == NUM_ONCE_THREADS, "doneCount = %d", doneCount);
>> testDiag("init was run by %s", initBy);
>>
>>> On Oct 29, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Davidsaver, Michael wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think this is noise caused by a test of the recursive once detection.
>>>> If a thread once call recurses the thread is suspended.
>>
>> I completely disagree, the test that failed was run before the recursive
>> detection test.
>>
>> I'm guessing that Eric is using a fairly slow CPU which took longer than 0.1
>> seconds for the ~8 context switches in the test to take place.
>>
>> Please keep these discussions *on* the list, it's there for archival purposes
>> as much as anything; if people don't like the volume they can un-subscribe and
>> just follow tech-talk.
>>
>> - Andrew
>> --
>> If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will
>> scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will
>> refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something
>> which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he
>> will accept it even on the slightest evidence. -- Bertrand Russell
>>
>
> --
> Eric Norum
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
--
Eric Norum
[email protected]
- References:
- Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Andrew Johnson
- Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Eric Norum
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Eric Norum
- Next:
Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Eric Norum
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
<2010>
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Eric Norum
- Next:
Re: RTEMS tests -- epicsThreadOnce broken? Eric Norum
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
<2010>
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|