From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Spiers Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] check-ignore: allow incremental streaming of queries via --stdin Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:02:35 +0100 Message-ID: <20130424080235.GC17889@pacific.linksys.moosehall> References: <20130411110511.GB24296@pacific.linksys.moosehall> <1365681913-7059-1-git-send-email-git@adamspiers.org> <1365681913-7059-4-git-send-email-git@adamspiers.org> <20130411191132.GC3177@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130411203141.GB21091@pacific.linksys.moosehall> <7vbo96phmn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git list To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 24 10:02:45 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UUuf5-0002qr-Um for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:02:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757896Ab3DXICi (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 04:02:38 -0400 Received: from coral.adamspiers.org ([85.119.82.20]:58413 "EHLO coral.adamspiers.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757517Ab3DXICg (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2013 04:02:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (d.b.d.8.9.7.2.8.b.4.d.e.3.e.0.4.0.d.3.7.6.a.1.1.0.b.8.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa [IPv6:2001:8b0:11a6:73d0:40e3:ed4b:8279:8dbd]) by coral.adamspiers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 93D5C58EB2; Wed, 24 Apr 2013 09:02:35 +0100 (BST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vbo96phmn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-OS: GNU/Linux User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:03:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Adam Spiers writes: > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:11:32PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> I always get a little nervous with sleeps in the test suite, as they are > >> indicative that we are trying to avoid some race condition, which means > >> that the test can fail when the system is under load, or when a tool > >> like valgrind is used which drastically alters the timing (e.g., if > >> check-ignore takes longer than 1 second to produce its answer, we may > >> fail here). > > > > Agreed, especially here where my btrfs filesystems see fit to kindly > > freeze my system for a few seconds many times each day :-/ > > > >> Is there a simpler way to test this? > >> > >> Like: > >> ... > > I'll re-roll using your approach. > > I think I missed this one and it already is in 'next'. > > I'll hold it back so please make your re-roll into an incremental > update. Will do - will probably take a few days more though, since I'm currently catching up on a post-travel work backlog.