[LTP] Issue with the reporting of failed tests

[Mason]

On 22/04/2016 15:29, Mason wrote:
> On 21/04/2016 19:02, Mason wrote:
>> On 21/04/2016 17:42, Mason wrote:
>>> On 21/04/2016 17:30, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>> Calling fflush does appear to solve the problem:
>>>>>
>>>>> # grep -c FAIL result-log.5160
>>>>> 38
>>>>>
>>>>> # wc -l result-failed.5160
>>>>> 38 result-failed.5160
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this mean no one ever reads FAILCMDFILE?!
>>>>
>>>> Just to have complete image here. I've discussed this a bit more at #ltp
>>>> irc channel and the reason why we do not see this bug often is that the
>>>> exec() that is done by the child after pan forks must fail (for example
>>>> since bash is missing) then the code proceeds to exit(errno) line which
>>>> flushes the buffers on open files...
>>>
>>> Note: in my latest LTP run, I disabled memory overcommit, and pan
>>> failed to launch several tests:
>>>
>>> pan(5163): fork failed (tag proc01).  errno:12  Cannot allocate memory
>>> pan(5163): fork failed (tag fs_racer).  errno:12  Cannot allocate memory
>>> pan(5163): fork failed (tag quota_remount_test01).  errno:12  Cannot allocate memory
>>> pan(5163): fork failed (tag isofs).  errno:12  Cannot allocate memory
>>> pan(5163): fork failed (tag fs_perms01).  errno:12  Cannot allocate memory
>>> [747 similar lines]
>>>
>>> /tmp is a ramfs. Maybe something fills it up...
>>
>> With overcommit enabled, all tests complete, but some problems remain:
>>
>> $ grep -c FAIL result-log.24583 
>> 85
>>
>> $ wc -l result-failed.24583
>> 157 result-failed.24583
>>
>> $ sort result-failed.24583 | uniq | wc -l
>> 83
>>
>> I'm confused as to what else is causing this...
> 
> I am now testing yet another LTP run with the following patch applied.

There still is an inconsistency between result-log and result-failed.

$ grep -c FAIL result-log.30032
119

$ wc -l result-failed.30032
319 result-failed.30032

$ sort result-failed.30032 | uniq | wc -l
117

Either I didn't use the modified ltp-pan binary, or the change has no effect.
(I will print something to stderr to make sure.)

Regards.