Uniprocessor Tests in SMP Configuration

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Tue Feb 18 15:19:04 UTC 2014

On 2/18/2014 1:12 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello Joel,
> On 2014-02-17 18:08, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Hi
>> Has anyone reviewed the results yet?
> I executed the tests during development of the SMP priority scheduler.  All 
> tests using unimplemented features fail.
And these are expected fails but is there a list of expected fails? The
impact of
those on coverage evaluated?

I know our testing framework is poor and in the process of being improved
but this is important information.
>> With at least no-preempt and ISR disable level not honored
>> in the thread mode when SMP is enabled, I would assume
>> multiple tests are expected to break.
> I collected unsupported features in SMP mode here:
> http://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/testsuites/smptests/smpunsupported01/init.c
> What do you mean with "ISR disable level not honored in the thread mode when 
> SMP is enabled"?
I misremembered the SMP conditionals in taskmode.c. Only no-preempt is

FWIW It may be better to not build task variables than to just return an
error. That is an entire class of capability that is not supported in
SMP. The tests for that would fail to link and could then just be
disabled from building.

Disable preemption is more subtle. The tests of rtems_task_mode()
need addressing. But other tests simply will not work. The impact on
coverage is unknown.

Each feature not supported in SMP needs careful evaluation.

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985

More information about the devel mailing list