Re: [PATCH nft v4 4/4] tests: Introduce test for set with concatenated ranges

[Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 17:04:10 +0100
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> wrote:

> Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 11:34:42 +0100
> > Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 01:16:58AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:  
> > > > This test checks that set elements can be added, deleted, that
> > > > addition and deletion are refused when appropriate, that entries
> > > > time out properly, and that they can be fetched by matching values
> > > > in the given ranges.    
> > > 
> > > I'll keep this back so Phil doesn't have to do some knitting work
> > > meanwhile the tests finishes for those 3 minutes.  
> > 
> > But I wanted to see his production :(
> >   
> > > If this can be shortened, better. Probably you can add a parameter to
> > > enable the extra torture test mode not that is away from the
> > > ./run-test.sh path.  
> > 
> > I can't think of an easy way to remove that sleep(1), I could decrease
> > the timeouts passed to nft but then there's no portable way to wait for
> > less than one second.  
> 
> Even busybox' sleep can do 'sleep 0.01'

Wait, that's only if you build it with ENABLE_FEATURE_FANCY_SLEEP and
ENABLE_FLOAT_DURATION.

> do we really need to be *that* portable?

I don't actually know :)

However, with Phil's idea:

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:51:47 +0100
Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:

> You could test the timeout feature just once and for all? I doubt there
> will ever be a bug in that feature which only a certain data type
> exposes, but you may e.g. create all the sets with elements at the same
> time so waiting for the timeout once is enough.

which I think is entirely reasonable, this becomes a single
one-second sleep, so it shouldn't be a problem anymore.

I would propose that I try this first, see if it gets reasonable, if
it's not enough I'd go on and just reduce the number of combinations
depending on how the script is invoked.

-- 
Stefano