From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 15 May 2008 16:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m4FNQEbb022517 for ; Thu, 15 May 2008 16:26:16 -0700 Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 09:26:51 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] scale down 074 on lower end machines Message-ID: <20080515232651.GA155679365@sgi.com> References: <20080515173913.GA11494@lst.de> <20080515221510.GT155679365@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080515221510.GT155679365@sgi.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: David Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 08:15:10AM +1000, David Chinner wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 07:39:13PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > 074 takes ages to complete on my kvm test VM, but scaling it back to the > > level used on IRIX makes it complete in slightly under 10 minutes. > > > > I'm not sure if checking for UP vs SMP is the right way to go into slow > > mode, but I couldn't think of anything better. > > Seems fair - I was wondering exactly the same thing yesterday > as this is another test that takes >15min to run on UML. I didn't > think of the UP vs SMP trigger, but it seems like a good way to > go given all of the real QA boxes we have are SMP. > > I'll give it a run and see how it goes. FWIW - runtime on UML has dropped from 918s to 88s. Very reasonable now, and makes the maximum single test runtime in UML about 330s.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group