From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: zlang@redhat.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
fstests@vger.kernel.org, guan@eryu.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] check: add a -smoketest option
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 15:04:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230727190410.GI30264@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <169033660570.3222210.3010411210438664310.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs>
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 06:56:45PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
>
> Create a "-smoketest" parameter to check that will run generic
> filesystem smoke testing for five minutes apiece. Since there are only
> five smoke tests, this is effectively a 16min super-quick test.
The code is setting SOAK_DURATION to 4 minutes, not 5 minutes.
However, when I ran the moral equivalent:
kvm-xfstests --soak-duration 4m --fail-loop-count 0 -c ext4/4k \
generic/475 generic/476 generic/521 generic/522 generic/642
It overall took 17 minutes to run, with just under a minute of test
infrastructure overhead (in the check script and my wrapper scripts),
with the actual test time as follows:
ext4/4k: 5 tests, 975 seconds
generic/475 Pass 242s
generic/476 Pass 244s
generic/521 Pass 241s
generic/522 Pass 241s
generic/642 Pass 7s
Totals: 5 tests, 0 skipped, 0 failures, 0 errors, 975s
The time which generic/642 ran was surprising so I took a closer look.
It does claim to be in group "soak", and it even tries to canonicalize
SOAK_DURATION (I'm not sure why, since the check script does this
already). But generic/642 doesn't seem to use SOAK_DURATION. It does
caculate a DURATION value, but it doesn't actually use SOAK_DURATION.
So that sounds like a bug in the generic/642 test?
There was also a bug xfstests's "make install" in that it doesn't
actually install src/soak_duration.awk, but I'll send that a patch
fixing that under separate cover.
Darrick -- suppose changed the SOAK_DURATION down to 2 minutes? How
much do you think that would materially affect the code coverage
metrics, and the overall effectiveness of the smoke test? If we get
generci/642 to honor SOAK_DURATION, using an overall 2 minute soak for
each test would translate to the smoke test taking about 13 minutes,
which would be great from a drive-by patch submitter perspective.
- Ted
> With gcov enabled, running these tests yields about ~75% coverage for
> iomap and ~60% for xfs; or ~50% for ext4 and ~75% for ext4; and ~45% for
> btrfs. Coverage was about ~65% for the pagecache.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-27 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-26 1:56 [PATCHSET v2 0/2] fstests: testing improvements Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-26 1:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] check: add a -smoketest option Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-27 19:04 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2023-07-26 1:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] check: generate gcov code coverage reports at the end of each section Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-27 14:57 ` Zorro Lang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-07-19 1:10 [PATCHSET 0/2] fstests: testing improvements Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-19 1:10 ` [PATCH 1/2] check: add a -smoketest option Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-19 15:10 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-19 15:29 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-19 16:11 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-20 2:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-20 14:34 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-26 0:05 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-26 6:01 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-07-26 14:54 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-26 20:59 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-07-27 1:36 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-07-27 1:54 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-07-27 3:25 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-27 14:33 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-07-27 15:30 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-28 15:53 ` Theodore Ts'o
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230727190410.GI30264@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guan@eryu.me \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zlang@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).