From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56927 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751975AbcGTHBD (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jul 2016 03:01:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 15:01:00 +0800 From: Eryu Guan Subject: Re: [PATCH] fstests: btrfs: Test send on heavily deduped file Message-ID: <20160720070100.GU27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> References: <20160719024402.19324-1-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> <20160719043524.GL27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Qu Wenruo Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, fstests@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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