From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6628118A95A for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 01:47:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744595271; cv=none; b=l8QRuoHMk4NXFDShJ85Kk1b7SETtkCpo6JKYYMejkgv0HNVOP2U26wTfjDwGa88Eq+obl+iorl7uq1l+NwOcO6Et7t1yJD447yTXTMaOtOFJctz82HUBnTfBvbMhZoShrpNvxiP1nT5NGWhPiifn91uT6c6jV8BZp50cvSoaUMc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744595271; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5k+iwTuy+xrcUMLjSCP+Obud++46WTKcsMGcr7dqciE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=coNqBimQVkJuySSGgcxJ+KebKeC0/ikJb+NAgjho7g7+0zct4tzJ85z6akwG0gAq50oJyBeqiWTN5wmyw4NZX1PF2m6mAU0ti3fWNGlxhz4lkcf7p5Lp7xuo9x0DRjWCmmr5hio2UtGjyRIImBHAYjqdZYgehMZl8r2h92YzPpI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=18.9.28.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mit.edu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mit.edu Received: from macsyma.thunk.org (c-73-9-28-129.hsd1.il.comcast.net [73.9.28.129]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 53E1lLNq026151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 13 Apr 2025 21:47:23 -0400 Received: by macsyma.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id BF5C0345F0A; Sun, 13 Apr 2025 17:48:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 17:48:58 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, zlang@kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] check: Add -q option to support unconditional looping. Message-ID: <20250413214858.GA3219283@mit.edu> References: <762d80d522724f975df087c1e92cdd202fd18cae.1743670253.git.nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@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: <762d80d522724f975df087c1e92cdd202fd18cae.1743670253.git.nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com> On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 08:58:19AM +0000, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote: > This patch adds -q option through which one can run a given test > times unconditionally. It also prints pass/fail metrics at the end. > > The advantage of this over -L and -i/-I is that: > a. -L will not re-run a flakey test if the test passes for the first time. > b. -I/-i sets up devices during each iteration and hence slower. > Note -q will override -L . I'm wondering if we need to keep the current behavior of -I/-i. The primary difference between them and how your proposed -q works is that instead of iterating over the section, your proposed option iterates over each test. So for example, if a section contains generic/001 and generic/002, iterating using -i 3 will do this: generic/001 generic/002 generic/001 generic/002 generic/001 generic/002 While generic -q 3 would do this instead: generic/001 generic/001 generic/001 generic/002 generic/002 generic/002 At least for all of the use cases that I can think of where I might use -i 3, -q 3 is strictly better. So instead of adding more options which change how we might do iterations, could we perhaps just replace -i with your new -q? And change -I so that it also works like -q, except if any test fails, that we stop? - Ted