From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:33560 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727961AbeKJE7E (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Nov 2018 23:59:04 -0500 Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:17:04 -0500 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Subject: Re: [PATCH] fstest: CrashMonkey tests ported to xfstest Message-ID: <20181109191704.GE21078@thunk.org> References: <20181105052217.GT6311@dastard> <46630C6B-77FA-4D15-92E7-43B89AD889A0@gmail.com> <20181106231536.GB8691@thunk.org> <20181106233956.GX6311@dastard> <20181107020922.GY6311@dastard> <20181108094045.GB6311@dastard> <20181109031205.GC6311@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vijaychidambaram Velayudhan Pillai Cc: Dave Chinner , Jayashree Mohan , Eryu Guan , fstests , Amir Goldstein , Filipe Manana List-ID: How about creating a group "regress", and we can move them into tests/regress for better categorization, for regression tests? And for tests that attempt find new problems, we already have a group "fuzzers"; and perhaps there should be a some standard guieline for how long a single invocation of a fuzz test should run before quitting. I'd say something in the 5 to 15 minute range? People can always run the fuzz test multiple times, and if the fuzz test can save test between runs, it should matter that it's broken up into multiple test invocations. - Ted