From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C37CECAAD3 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 16:14:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741EC3CA974 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:14:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (in-4.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5FEB3C93EF for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:14:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CB5910007FD for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:14:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C64261FAA3; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 16:14:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1662394465; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PvFyyrF/b+2lO83BHf7n1G+1VgFTQ6oUb9XU5yWgVyo=; b=MisCgY9xWqrct9Uyy7+fJ7WNv/fxxdM3WHa8Fa1JryyM7tU2BZLA1kI0XpAyBBqLEtL5UB zBzvIbZaxs7aSEkGA3A+/isdN7xiKnjd296kLRkguyVbQJZXxhVQkX4YZ4EiZzwX6u9rQU p0PMRyAyUo5OczBuRMPIcY2lbHL3+5A= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1662394465; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PvFyyrF/b+2lO83BHf7n1G+1VgFTQ6oUb9XU5yWgVyo=; b=S1qdkeT7HuKu+4yuwES1WliSE2Th0l46WBfCW/cmFvyGEPXNFY4naemKtNFThWPJWTZopi oXWBtlJOrBRYnjCA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64677139C7; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 16:14:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id sxS9FmEgFmPZbgAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 05 Sep 2022 16:14:25 +0000 Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:14:23 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Martin Doucha Message-ID: References: <20220830135007.16818-1-mdoucha@suse.cz> <20220830135007.16818-4-mdoucha@suse.cz> <45d76082-49f3-74bb-fd3c-6f5fd2d6136f@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-4.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 03/10] ksm: Add max_runtime to tests X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > On 31. 08. 22 14:50, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > Hi! > > > Alternatively, we could measure 1 full ksmd scan in setup() and then set > > > max_runtime dynamically. Each call of create_same_memory() would need > > > roughly 16 scan times. Time spent in ksm_child_memset() is included in > > > that estimate. > > That sounds good as well, but I would still set the .max_runtime to > > rough guess in tst_test structure and then adjusted it in the test > > setup(). > The current patch is a good enough guess for ~2-4GB machines. Or do you want > to target bigger machines by default? I guess it'd be safer to expect machines with bigger memory. Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp