From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f49.google.com (mail-pj1-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8DAC2CAB for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 04:57:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.49 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737435448; cv=none; b=i841AbM6jxbrPBtUGbI/5dUnn6+cphPQmDIrfYKibym9zY34bJlqJmP+0k0ewFbPzxGgbyEANQmRs0lqTJ8QtKFCSMfhf/KedTWvDnP4M50/gDhz9FJixNC7qo0vhtQVKZ5S3Y5a//Q6YgUIwI7zn6sen7nfCPkK5RvoSbHnZ3U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737435448; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LzvpGy2HNylNqYLESYhqcy8f4XRjmR0j3QvxMkvSXsY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=C/9g5xo6ayDfyXa6B7t/pImHPLtef8MlBY7C288c6VWiaPLadgczqooeCRCkThwpKNb9bSkaorSrsJ+4JAkMzH8dturdmUbEY5im9vZwSc56b8sLBmYtbo5XXnkOGBFmXbIxd8OH+WBSL7gI6nrlk7xmWb9vXyOaZD5vuZA9USY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=fromorbit.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fromorbit.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fromorbit-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@fromorbit-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b=ikATPIqf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.49 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=fromorbit.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fromorbit.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fromorbit-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@fromorbit-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="ikATPIqf" Received: by mail-pj1-f49.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2f13acbe29bso9510675a91.1 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:57:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fromorbit-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1737435446; x=1738040246; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NaRd5BEXgLjUdSaPBhNbMRK8odD+++vFhADndLtd+k0=; b=ikATPIqf/VBJi2jHsAgiT+Sulg37Hna4OCZSsEWE0OIOu92rHGPEmek89nBozSKxgz F89Ezclc2GuT0z9tD5qcdCo95/7OMsyPoF1JT+RUTNDMNrXvUeuc1MRDWxn/YHD+LKP2 IG+2fW5KbHDJ5kyEFb5pu5hpV+eM8z0bw+39LjzQi/RkF22JA8Uac/AjSvlcTglGkDsB u1gwqcEbKloVdljCwiBgz79QkVrl3suEW1V2VdkPco6d949cPUBA1VJprY9CrDBVJhG4 HhaK5uwDW6+/8XuHzGBqr2FZpedjuUPk2MjYx0NzCOBBaujCKcq8HmGF0FJWms9mnxzO EYMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737435446; x=1738040246; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=NaRd5BEXgLjUdSaPBhNbMRK8odD+++vFhADndLtd+k0=; b=iQj87iJr6ElLiXeHkdHuEWhJNaLnfgsyDKeuw0/ImG9New1k7s0xb0DXiyzL//Y9yY DXytyNm4knDAZuwoN25VwpCLIfOJjkU/Ee4CHeNzCOiZ87nRXJ1xkMZxHzpiDat/cywE blYU4mFr5eRSkYA7o/MWHTwd5qTDvXQEojVk1WzvFrNFdkgiATpp+KloccujdAzXwUdK lagSXlJrogoSTa8U4UfTq3/FZzB3q7L6IwV94jTr8M7OGCA6jFeiaJlB5qzawrgp67al 4b78tbFKJkm+7cP3gJ019qU39T3Uba7mnbzfN1FISVGPtDihI7YAaoRvsNMHdTI8dHY0 SY/g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWaccblZIKcfSiNEZeVy/wWzhxQUNsG4Kio9q5a38Q31wdDr9aZH9hz8Kqa0nPy6KnNcG/neyS+@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyI/hUQt2Pt7mr/X/LMdYlIkDm5sQNYhpRdIVDpaP6KrQGXy6t8 6r5NX6jJ86KRZpR4SaVScu/0jNAPGiG90ik/dAEqx25W74sF20o/evC1Jq7qBXY= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu3hKxzOasNUokM9BSuxjOqQwpSL3ag8wCDouCMiNRwg9UOcvDxIawmoyafIkv Ax1zWcXSL99RZn4o8Wb6jTHc1qH4kdbNbyycwQqxgcGOlWg2ebSEeW//rnTCocAuJ1LScHmR6uW H7zzMXheAmoS3H2AwGEZisBKTwKz3rargBaoOhjTmbNWV/Hh5ua++ulIRZkGZ/6B4YUV8sT9gX3 oxct++jV09Av4EbNfY9MAWy2lUqghyWOB9La7CtAAVEjkG35PYyXYYNdLy2I6UREoPawiqf2a66 Y3PHxKu3s67YUMlF/sOs/tayqlrLOLR3xF0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHhUqsc5fp8YYPRrWEpYufjZNCM5fX19GmjtVEHcajApdFhV8lx2dEjw5EYrDkpAuYMz/bKFg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:4c87:b0:729:1c0f:b94e with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-72db1b6524bmr21997706b3a.6.1737435445976; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:57:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from dread.disaster.area (pa49-186-89-135.pa.vic.optusnet.com.au. [49.186.89.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-72dab8155e5sm8098496b3a.54.2025.01.20.20.57.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:57:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from dave by dread.disaster.area with local (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1ta6KJ-00000008XAi-0E4i; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:57:23 +1100 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:57:23 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: zlang@redhat.com, hch@lst.de, fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/23] generic/650: revert SOAK DURATION changes Message-ID: References: <173706974044.1927324.7824600141282028094.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> <173706974273.1927324.11899201065662863518.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <173706974273.1927324.11899201065662863518.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs> On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 03:28:33PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong > > Prior to commit 8973af00ec21, in the absence of an explicit > SOAK_DURATION, this test would run 2500 fsstress operations each of ten > times through the loop body. On the author's machines, this kept the > runtime to about 30s total. Oddly, this was changed to 30s per loop > body with no specific justification in the middle of an fsstress process > management change. I'm pretty sure that was because when you run g/650 on a machine with 64p, the number of ops performed on the filesystem is nr_cpus * 2500 * nr_loops. In that case, each loop was taking over 90s to run, so the overall runtime was up in the 15-20 minute mark. I wanted to cap the runtime of each loop to min(nr_ops, SOAK_DURATION) so that it ran in about 5 minutes in the worst case i.e. (nr_loops * SOAK_DURATION). I probably misunderstood how -n nr_ops vs --duration=30 interact; I expected it to run until either were exhausted, not for duration to override nr_ops as implied by this: > On the author's machine, this explodes the runtime from ~30s to 420s. > Put things back the way they were. Yeah, OK, that's exactly waht keep_running() does - duration overrides nr_ops. Ok, so keeping or reverting the change will simply make different people unhappy because of the excessive runtime the test has at either ends of the CPU count spectrum - what's the best way to go about providing the desired min(nr_ops, max loop time) behaviour? Do we simply cap the maximum process count to keep the number of ops down to something reasonable (e.g. 16), or something else? -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com