| Message ID | 20150402042950.GA5643@gondor.apana.org.au |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On 04/02/15 at 12:29pm, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 12:11:35PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > Yes it is contained in next-20150401 which is bad: > > > > # extra tests on tree/branch next/master > > git bisect bad e954104e2b634b42811dad8d502cbf240f206df2 # 21:22 0- 60 Add linux-next specific files for 20150401 > > > > The dmesg there is > > > > [ 1.149409] test_firmware: interface ready > > [ 1.150293] Running resizable hashtable tests... > > [ 1.151209] Adding 2048 keys > > [ 1.152069] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > [ 1.152978] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at lib/rhashtable.c:409 rhashtable_insert_rehash+0x9d/0x1d0() > > I see. This is actually a completely different problem. > > ---8<--- > test_rhashtable: Remove bogus max_size setting > > Now that resizing is completely automatic, we need to remove > the max_size setting or the test will fail. > > Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Had the same fix queued up in an upcoming series ;-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 08:33:56 +0100 > On 04/02/15 at 12:29pm, Herbert Xu wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 12:11:35PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: >> > >> > Yes it is contained in next-20150401 which is bad: >> > >> > # extra tests on tree/branch next/master >> > git bisect bad e954104e2b634b42811dad8d502cbf240f206df2 # 21:22 0- 60 Add linux-next specific files for 20150401 >> > >> > The dmesg there is >> > >> > [ 1.149409] test_firmware: interface ready >> > [ 1.150293] Running resizable hashtable tests... >> > [ 1.151209] Adding 2048 keys >> > [ 1.152069] ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> > [ 1.152978] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at lib/rhashtable.c:409 rhashtable_insert_rehash+0x9d/0x1d0() >> >> I see. This is actually a completely different problem. >> >> ---8<--- >> test_rhashtable: Remove bogus max_size setting >> >> Now that resizing is completely automatic, we need to remove >> the max_size setting or the test will fail. >> >> Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> > > Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> > > Had the same fix queued up in an upcoming series ;-) Applied to net-next, thanks everyone. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/lib/test_rhashtable.c b/lib/test_rhashtable.c index a42a0d4..b295754 100644 --- a/lib/test_rhashtable.c +++ b/lib/test_rhashtable.c @@ -44,7 +44,6 @@ static const struct rhashtable_params test_rht_params = { .key_offset = offsetof(struct test_obj, value), .key_len = sizeof(int), .hashfn = jhash, - .max_size = 2, /* we expand/shrink manually here */ .nulls_base = (3U << RHT_BASE_SHIFT), };