* xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check @ 2013-04-13 20:50 Michael L. Semon 2013-04-14 23:26 ` Dave Chinner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Michael L. Semon @ 2013-04-13 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xfstests I'm trying to get the new xfstests to run the XFS tests first, then run the generic group, then run the shared group. One attempt was to work with this variable in the ./check script: SRC_GROUPS="generic shared" There is a final file sort in ./check that means, no matter which order groups are specified in SRC_GROUPS, the groups will be executed in alphabetical order. This sysadmin kludge patch fixes that behavior and seems to work. By moving the sorting into the trim_test_list() function, test numbers are still sorted, but the groups seem to run in the order specified in the SRC_GROUPS variable. Let me know if this helps or if I'm simply not using the new xfstests correctly. Michael --- xfstests/check.orig 2013-03-30 00:54:37.000000000 -0400 +++ xfstests/check 2013-04-13 13:41:42.002814733 -0400 @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ echo "^$t\$" >>$tmp.grep numsed=`expr $numsed + 1` done - grep -v -f $tmp.grep <$tmp.list >$tmp.tmp + grep -v -f $tmp.grep <$tmp.list | sort -n >$tmp.tmp mv $tmp.tmp $tmp.list } @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ fi # sort the list of tests into numeric order -list=`sort -n $tmp.list` +list=`cat $tmp.list` rm -f $tmp.list $tmp.tmp $tmp.grep if $randomize _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check 2013-04-13 20:50 xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check Michael L. Semon @ 2013-04-14 23:26 ` Dave Chinner 2013-04-15 3:29 ` Michael L. Semon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Dave Chinner @ 2013-04-14 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael L. Semon; +Cc: xfstests On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:50:06PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote: > I'm trying to get the new xfstests to run the XFS tests first, then The question is why do you want to do this? Is there any specific reason for running the tests in that order? FWIW, if all you want to do is run the xfs tests, run: $ sudo ./check xfs[0-9][0-9][0-9] Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check 2013-04-14 23:26 ` Dave Chinner @ 2013-04-15 3:29 ` Michael L. Semon 2013-04-22 18:25 ` Rich Johnston 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Michael L. Semon @ 2013-04-15 3:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: xfstests On 04/14/2013 07:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:50:06PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote: >> I'm trying to get the new xfstests to run the XFS tests first, then > > The question is why do you want to do this? Is there any specific > reason for running the tests in that order? > > FWIW, if all you want to do is run the xfs tests, run: > > $ sudo ./check xfs[0-9][0-9][0-9] > > Cheers, > > Dave. > Personal preference. I'd like to run both series of tests, sometimes attended, sometimes unattended. It's fine if a generic/ test crashes the PC while running unattended, but I'd much rather the xfs/ tests have first crack at that. My version of the syntax was `./check xfs/[0-9][0-9][0-9]`, but that becomes rough when skipping tests. I'll still try your version, but irrationality and frustration have driven me to simply adding a "mls" group to all of the tests/<fsgroup>/group files, then hoping that a `./check -g mls` would run everything in the correct order. That led to trying to figure out why the generic/ tests were running first, and so on and so forth... Thanks! Michael _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check 2013-04-15 3:29 ` Michael L. Semon @ 2013-04-22 18:25 ` Rich Johnston 2013-04-23 14:08 ` Michael L. Semon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Rich Johnston @ 2013-04-22 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael L. Semon; +Cc: xfstests On 04/14/2013 10:29 PM, Michael L. Semon wrote: > On 04/14/2013 07:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:50:06PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote: >>> I'm trying to get the new xfstests to run the XFS tests first, then >> >> The question is why do you want to do this? Is there any specific >> reason for running the tests in that order? >> >> FWIW, if all you want to do is run the xfs tests, run: >> >> $ sudo ./check xfs[0-9][0-9][0-9] >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dave. >> > > Personal preference. I'd like to run both series of tests, sometimes > attended, sometimes unattended. It's fine if a generic/ test crashes > the PC while running unattended, but I'd much rather the xfs/ tests have > first crack at that. > > My version of the syntax was `./check xfs/[0-9][0-9][0-9]`, but that > becomes rough when skipping tests. I'll still try your version, but I think this is a reasonable change request and I can see how this would be very rough if you wanted to skip tests. Anyone have a reason why not to do this? Regards, --Rich > irrationality and frustration have driven me to simply adding a "mls" > group to all of the tests/<fsgroup>/group files, then hoping that a > `./check -g mls` would run everything in the correct order. That led to > trying to figure out why the generic/ tests were running first, and so > on and so forth... > > Thanks! > > Michael _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check 2013-04-22 18:25 ` Rich Johnston @ 2013-04-23 14:08 ` Michael L. Semon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Michael L. Semon @ 2013-04-23 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rich Johnston; +Cc: xfstests On 04/22/2013 02:25 PM, Rich Johnston wrote: > On 04/14/2013 10:29 PM, Michael L. Semon wrote: >> On 04/14/2013 07:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 04:50:06PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote: >>>> I'm trying to get the new xfstests to run the XFS tests first, then >>> >>> The question is why do you want to do this? Is there any specific >>> reason for running the tests in that order? >>> >>> FWIW, if all you want to do is run the xfs tests, run: >>> >>> $ sudo ./check xfs[0-9][0-9][0-9] >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Dave. >>> >> >> Personal preference. I'd like to run both series of tests, sometimes >> attended, sometimes unattended. It's fine if a generic/ test crashes >> the PC while running unattended, but I'd much rather the xfs/ tests have >> first crack at that. >> >> My version of the syntax was `./check xfs/[0-9][0-9][0-9]`, but that >> becomes rough when skipping tests. I'll still try your version, but > > I think this is a reasonable change request and I can see how this would > be very rough if you wanted to skip tests. Anyone have a reason why not > to do this? > > Regards, > --Rich It's a good change request, but on further testing, it seems like my kludge patch breaks basic sorting, i.e. `./check generic/003 generic/001 generic/002` will run the tests in exactly that order. That's not necessarily bad--principle of least surprise--but it means that to get the old xfstests sorting behavior, it would have to be sorted using another method. Thanks for considering the need for more control over the order in which groups are run. It's most certainly appreciated. Thinking out loud: Is there a disadvantage to setting $SRC_DIR to "." instead of "tests"? It looks like a nice way to get `./check tests/generic/001` to run tests/generic/001 instead of issuing "unknown test, ignored", but I've tested it only for generic/001 here at work. Michael >> irrationality and frustration have driven me to simply adding a "mls" >> group to all of the tests/<fsgroup>/group files, then hoping that a >> `./check -g mls` would run everything in the correct order. That led to >> trying to figure out why the generic/ tests were running first, and so >> on and so forth... >> >> Thanks! >> >> Michael _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-04-23 14:08 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-04-13 20:50 xfstests: kludge patch for per-dir test number sorting by ./check Michael L. Semon 2013-04-14 23:26 ` Dave Chinner 2013-04-15 3:29 ` Michael L. Semon 2013-04-22 18:25 ` Rich Johnston 2013-04-23 14:08 ` Michael L. Semon
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox