LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST for 2.6.25] Use an own random generator for pageattr-test.c
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:48:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080311114832.GE18917@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0803111233440.3781@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 12:41:13PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 09:25:21AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > Use an own random generator for pageattr-test.c
> > > > 
> > > > [Repost. Please ack/nack. This is a bug fix and imho a .25 late merge 
> > > > candidate because it fixes a subtle bug]
> > > 
> > > Care to point out which "subtle bug" is fixed ? 
> > > 
> > > You replace a random generator by another to get repeateable
> > > sequences. The non repeatability of the cpa test patterns is hardly a
> > > "subtle bug".
> > 
> > The subtle bug(s) are first that it is not repeatable (it really should),
> 
> As I said before. It's hardly a bug. In fact it is questionable
> whether fully reproducible test patterns are desired.

Ok then you won't be able to repeat the test ever.

I consider this bad practice in test code because it makes it impossible
to stabilize bugs and when I wrote it I tried to avoid by using the 
srandom32(). But I originally fell into the trap of assuming it had the 
same semantics of stdlib srandom() which it didn't. This patch was
my attempt to fix that mistake.

> 
> > then that it only initializes the CPU where the code first runs
> > (since srandom32 is per CPU) and later might change CPUs and then that it 
> > adds totally unnecessary state bits to CPU #0 (or whatever runs first).
> 
> Can you please elaborate why changing the seed of the random generator
> is a bug ? Networking reseeds the random generator itself, so what ?

It adds a non random seed which does not add any randomness only to CPU #0.
Strictly it doesn't hurt very much, but it's also not useful for anything.

-Andi


  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-11 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-11  1:30 Andi Kleen
2008-03-11  2:39 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-11  8:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-11 10:45   ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-11 11:41     ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-11 11:48       ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-03-11 21:08         ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-11 21:49           ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-11 21:59             ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-03-11 22:11               ` Andi Kleen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080311114832.GE18917@one.firstfloor.org \
    --to=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH REPOST for 2.6.25] Use an own random generator for pageattr-test.c' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).