Re: [PATCH] selftests/mqueue: Set timeout to 100 seconds

[SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>]

On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 16:01:20 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 05:13:09PM -0800, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > A gentle reminder.
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > SJ
> > 
> > On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 09:42:43 -0800 SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 10:30:38 +0000 "Mohamed Abuelfotoh, Hazem" <abuehaze@amazon.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 08/02/2024 21:29, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > > > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > While mq_perf_tests runs with the default kselftest timeout limit, which
> > > > > is 45 seconds, the test takes about 60 seconds to complete on i3.metal
> > > > > AWS instances.  Hence, the test always times out.  Increase the timeout
> > > > > to 100 seconds.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fixes: 852c8cbf34d3 ("selftests/kselftest/runner.sh: Add 45 second timeout per test")
> > > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.4.x
> > > > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >   tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting | 1 +
> > > > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > >   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting b/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
> > > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > > index 000000000000..54dc12287839
> > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> > > > > +timeout=100
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.39.2
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Added Vijai Kumar to CC
> > > > 
> > > > This looks similar to [PATCH] kselftest: mqueue: increase timeout 
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220622085911.2292509-1-Vijaikumar_Kanagarajan@mentor.com/T/#r12820aede6bba015b70ae33323e29ae27d5b69c7 
> > > > which was increasing the timeout to 180 however it's not clear why this 
> > > > hasn't been merged yet.
> 
> Should it be 100 or 180?

As mentioned on the previous mail[1], either values are good to me :)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240215011309.73168-1-sj@kernel.org

> Either way:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

Thank you!


Thanks,
SJ

> 
> -- 
> Kees Cook
>