On 21/07/23 07:07, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 08:58:53AM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote: >> On 20/07/23 21:00, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 12:53:05PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 05:30:53PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote: >> >> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE11 b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE11 >> >> > new file mode 100644 >> >> > index 0000000000000..aa7274efd9819 >> >> > --- /dev/null >> >> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/configs/rcu/TREE11 >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ >> >> > +CONFIG_SMP=y >> >> > +CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8 >> >> > +CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=n >> >> > +CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY=y >> >> > +CONFIG_PREEMPT=n >> >> > +CONFIG_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC=n >> >> > +#CHECK#CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y >> >> > +CONFIG_HZ_PERIODIC=n >> >> > +CONFIG_NO_HZ_IDLE=n >> >> > +CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=y >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=4 >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_LEAF=3 >> >> > +CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=n >> >> > +CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_RCU_HEAD=n >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_EXPERT=y >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_EQS_DEBUG=y >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_LAZY=y >> >> > +CONFIG_RCU_DYNTICKS_BITS=2 >> >> >> >> Why not just add this last line to the existing TREE04 scenario? >> >> That would ensure that it gets tested regularly without extending the >> >> time required to run a full set of rcutorture tests. >> > >> > Please see below for the version of this patch that I am running overnight >> > tests with. Does this one work for you? >> >> Yep that's fine with me. I only went with a separate test file as wasn't >> sure how new test options should be handled (merged into existing tests vs >> new tests created), and didn't want to negatively impact TREE04 or >> TREE06. If merging into TREE04 is preferred, then I'll do just that and >> carry this path moving forwards. > > Things worked fine for this one-hour-per-scenario test run on my laptop, Many thanks for testing! > except for the CONFIG_SMP=n runs, which all got build errors like the > following. > Harumph, yes !SMP (and !CONTEXT_TRACKING_WORK) doesn't compile nicely, I'll fix that for v3.
