From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA99C433EF for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 06:37:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229818AbiGLGhP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2022 02:37:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53484 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229629AbiGLGhN (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2022 02:37:13 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 918EE2612B for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:37:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 10266 invoked by uid 109); 12 Jul 2022 06:37:11 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 06:37:11 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 27476 invoked by uid 111); 12 Jul 2022 06:37:10 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 02:37:10 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 02:37:09 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Han Xin , Michael J Gruber , chiyutianyi@gmail.com, derrickstolee@github.com, git@vger.kernel.org, haiyangtand@gmail.com, jonathantanmy@google.com, me@ttaylorr.com, ps@pks.im Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] commit-graph.c: no lazy fetch in lookup_commit_in_graph() Message-ID: References: <96d4bb71505d87ed501c058bbd89bfc13d08b24a.1656593279.git.hanxin.hx@bytedance.com> <165736941632.704481.18414237954289110814.git@grubix.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 10:23:01PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > The tricky thing about using ulimit is that it's tied to the entire development > > station. I have tried to run the test without any limit [1], it did finally be > > canceled after 6 hours. > > I am not worried so much about developer workstation, which people > are sitting in front of. They can ^C any runaway test way before 6 > hours just fine. > > I am assuming that we do not have to be worried about CI settings > too much, either, as they should already be prepared to catch > run-away processes. Agreed. Also, I think that although it's natural to worry about a bug we know about causing an infinite loop, it's much more likely that a _new_ bug will cause one. I.e., every test we already carry is a candidate to accidentally loop forever in this way. This is just the one we happen to have seen. Once fixed, I don't know that it's at any more risk of reocurring than any other problem. -Peff