From: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fstests: btrfs: Test send on heavily deduped file
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:01:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160720070100.GU27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fb7acb1e-3835-1511-d66e-7d186c94e35e@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 01:42:03PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >
> > This test uses $LOAD_FACTOR, so it should be in 'stress' group. And it
> > hangs the latest kernel, stop other tests from running, I think we can
> > add it to 'dangerous' group as well.
> >
>
> Thanks for this info.
> I'm completely OK to add this group to 'stress' and 'dangerous'.
>
>
> However I'm a little curious about the meaning/standard of these groups.
>
> Does 'dangerous' conflicts with 'auto'?
> Since under most case, tester would just execute './check -g auto' and the
> system hangs at the test case.
> So I'm a little confused with the 'auto' group.
I quote my previous email here to explain the 'auto' group
http://www.spinics.net/lists/fstests/msg03262.html
"
I searched for Dave's explainations on 'auto' group in his reviews, and
got the following definitions:
- it should be a valid & reliable test (it's finished and have
deterministic output) [1]
- it passes on current upstream kernels, if it fails, it's likely to be
resolved in forseeable future [2]
- it should take no longer than 5 minutes to finish [3]
"
And "The only difference between quick and auto group criteria is the
test runtime." Usually 'quick' tests finish within 30s.
For the 'dangerous' group, it was added in commit 3f28d55c3954 ("add
freeze and dangerous groups"), and seems that it didn't have a very
clear definition[*]. But I think any test that could hang/crash recent
kernels is considered as dangerous.
* http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2012-03/msg00073.html
For this test, it triggers soft lockup on latest 4.7-rc7 kernel and
prevents further tests from running, so it's part of dangerous. And this
bug will be fixed in forseeable future, right? So it's OK to add 'auto'
group. And we can always remove 'dangerous' group from tests when we
find they're only crashing old kernels, e.g. commit 8c94797 ext4: move
30[1234] from the dangerous to the auto group
For running tests, "./check -g auto -x dangerous" might fit your need.
Thanks,
Eryu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-20 7:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-19 2:44 [PATCH] fstests: btrfs: Test send on heavily deduped file Qu Wenruo
2016-07-19 4:35 ` Eryu Guan
2016-07-19 5:42 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-07-20 7:01 ` Eryu Guan [this message]
2016-07-20 7:40 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-07-20 23:37 ` Dave Chinner
2016-07-21 2:05 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-07-21 22:57 ` Dave Chinner
2016-07-20 23:30 ` Dave Chinner
2016-07-19 5:06 ` Qu Wenruo
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=20160720070100.GU27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=eguan@redhat.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox