1f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ciOn Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 12:35:59PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: 2f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> If you want some real nasty tests: 3f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> 4f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> hotplug_locking: create 10 threads, make them try to online/offline 5f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> random cpus, all in paralel. (This is what I was doing in smaller 6f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> scale). You'll get some expected errors (like cpu already up), but 7f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> system should survive. 8f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> 9f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> cpufreq: change cpufreq parameters on cpu (toggling min/max 10f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> frequency?) while trying to online/offline that cpu from another 11f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> thread. 12f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> 13f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> suspend: swapoff -a, then proceed like in hotplug_locking, while 14f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> trying to suspend machine to disk (it will immediately wake up because 15f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> of no swap available). Should be useful at pointing out bugs in 16f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> suspend code. (but quite tricky to setup the test, so you may or may 17f08c3bdfSopenharmony_ci> not want to do this one). 18