Hello,
>> +prlog "Causing kernel crash ..."
>> +
>> +# enable all functions triggered by sysrq
>> +echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq
>> +# setting to reboot in 3 seconds after panic
>> +echo 3 > /proc/sys/kernel/panic
>> +# setting to cause panic when oops occurs
>> +echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/panic_on_oops
>> +
>> +# create a file as reboot flag
>> +touch $REBOOT_FILE
>> +sync
>> +
>> +# cause crash
>> +echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger
>
> Do you need to stop kdump service before the sysrq?
Yes, I should check /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_loaded. If the value is
1, this script should try to unload kexec kernel.
> Or, does it cover oops and kdump case?
No, not yet. I think we should support oops case at first.
Best regards,
Hiraku Toyooka
阿口誠司 / AGUCHI，SEIJI wrote:
+prlog "Causing kernel crash ..."
+
+# enable all functions triggered by sysrq
+echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/sysrq
+# setting to reboot in 3 seconds after panic
+echo 3 > /proc/sys/kernel/panic
+# setting to cause panic when oops occurs
+echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/panic_on_oops
+
+# create a file as reboot flag
+touch $REBOOT_FILE
+sync
+
+# cause crash
+echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger
Do you need to stop kdump service before the sysrq?
Or, does it cover oops and kdump case?
Seiji
-----Original Message-----
From: 豊岡拓 / Toyooka，Hiraku
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:42 AM
To: Kees Cook
Cc: LKML; Tony Luck; Linux API; Anton Vorontsov; Shuah Khan; Mark Salyzyn; Colin Cross; 阿口誠司 / AGUCHI，SEIJI
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/pstore: add pstore test scripts going with reboot
Hello Kees,
>> +run_crash:
>> + @sh pstore_crash_test || echo "pstore_crash_test: [FAIL]"
>
> This is probably better written to exit 1 on failure, otherwise it
> just _says_ it fails. (Though lots of selftests in the tree already
> have this problem, it's best to avoid the pattern for new stuff.)
> Maybe something like:
>
> @sh pstore_crash_test || { echo "pstore_crash_test: [FAIL]";
exit 1; }
OK. I'll add the "exit 1".
>> +prlog -n "Checking dmesg files exist in pstore filesystem ... "
>> +if [ -e dmesg-${backend}-0 ]; then
>> + prlog "ok"
>> + for f in `ls dmesg-${backend}-*`; do
>> + prlog -e "\t${f}"
>> + done
>> +else
>> + prlog "FAIL"
>> + rc=1
>> +fi
>
> This test pattern is repeated a lot. Maybe better to create a helper
> function instead? It could make the tests much more readable.
Yes, I should make a helper function in v2.
Best regards,
Hiraku Toyooka
--
Hiraku Toyooka
Systems Productivity Research Dept. / Linux Technology Center
Center for Technology Innovation - Systems Engineering, Hitachi Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
