From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [Automated-testing] [PATCH 3/4] lib: Introduce concept of max_test_runtime
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 21:44:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YMZgONrus6i45R9U@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fd006cd4-2f65-138a-8907-94153ee3b45e@suse.cz>
Hi all,
> On 09. 06. 21 15:32, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > Hi!
> >>> - the scaled value is then divided, if needed, so that we end up a
> >>> correct maximal runtime for an instance of a test, i.e. we have
> >>> max runtime for an instance fork_testrun() that is inside of
> >>> .test_variants and .all_filesystems loops
> >> Now "Max runtime per iteration" can vary, right? I.e. on .all_filesystems
> >> runtime for each filesystems depends on number of filesystems? E.g. writev03.c
> >> with setup .timeout = 600 on 2 filesystems is 5 min (300s), but with all 9
> >> filesystems is about 1 min. We should document that author should expect max
> >> number of filesystems. What happen with these values in the (long) future, when
> >> LTP support new filesystem (or drop some)? This was a reason for me to define in
> >> the test value for "Max runtime per iteration", not whole run.
> > That's one of the downsides of this approach.
> > The reason why I choose this approach is that you can set upper cap for
> > the whole test run and not only for a single filesystem/variant.
> > Also this way the test timeout corresponds to the maximal test runtime.
> > Another option would be to redefine the timeout to be timeout per a
> > fork_testrun() instance, which would make the approach slightly easier
> > in some places, however that would mean either changing default test
> > timeout to much smaller value and annotating all long running tests.
> > Hmm, I guess that annotating all long running tests and changing default
> > timeout may be a good idea regardless this approach.
> Some fuzzysync tests have long run time by design because running too
> few loops on broken systems will not trigger the bug. Limiting maximum
> program execution time may be useful for quick smoke tests but it's not
> usable for real test runs where we want reliable reproducibility.
Interesting.
> I'd prefer adding a command line option to tst_test (e.g. -m) that would
> just print test metadata, including total timeout of all fork_testrun()
> subtests, and exit. Static metadata is not a sufficient solution for
FYI I suggested this some time ago with private chat with Cyril, he mentioned
that there were some problems with it. IMHO it'd be great to implement it.
> this because the same test binary may have different runtimes on
> different system configurations, for example because the list of
> available filesystems may change arbitrarily between test runs. It'd be
> great if test runners other than runltp-ng could get a straighforward
> timeout number without reimplementing a calculation that may change in
> future versions of LTP.
+1
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-13 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-09 11:46 [LTP] [PATCH 0/4] Introduce a concept of test runtime cap Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 11:46 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/4] lib: tst_supported_fs_types: Add tst_fs_max_types() Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 11:46 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/4] lib: tst_test: Move timeout scaling out of fork_testrun() Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 11:46 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/4] lib: Introduce concept of max_test_runtime Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 13:24 ` [LTP] [Automated-testing] " Petr Vorel
2021-06-09 13:32 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 14:05 ` Petr Vorel
2021-06-09 13:43 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-11 15:07 ` Martin Doucha
2021-06-13 19:44 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2021-06-14 8:02 ` Richard Palethorpe
2021-06-09 14:44 ` [LTP] " Richard Palethorpe
2021-06-09 11:46 ` [LTP] [PATCH 4/4] syscalls/writev03: Adjust test runtime Cyril Hrubis
2021-06-09 14:54 ` [LTP] [PATCH 0/4] Introduce a concept of test runtime cap Richard Palethorpe
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=YMZgONrus6i45R9U@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.