From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: "\"Nícolas F. R. A.\" Prado" <nfraprado@collabora.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>,
kernel@collabora.com,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kselftest/alsa: pcm-test: Decrease stream duration from 4 to 2 seconds
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 18:34:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87352krcz5.wl-tiwai@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5c2d5213-5299-44f1-9611-26002c8a5d3a@notapiano>
On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 18:03:22 +0200,
Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 03:39:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 04:08:47PM +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> >
> > > I think that the problem is somewhere else here. The overall test timeout
> > > should be calculated dynamically. All tests may be queried for the maximal
> > > expected interval based on the hardware/software capabilities. It's a bit
> > > pitfall to have a fixed time limit where the realtime tests depend on the
> > > number of devices.
> >
> > I tend to agree here, unfortunately Shuah hasn't responded to queries
> > from Nícolas about this which I imagine is what inspired this patch. We
> > also have problems with mixer-test on one of the Dialog CODECs with a
> > couple of 64k value controls and no cache only mode.
>
> Yes, exactly. I've tried increasing the timeout for this test to a larger fixed
> value previously, and later asked for more information on how to deal with the
> kselftest timeout. [1]
>
> Since I didn't hear back, I thought this patch would be a way to at least
> mitigate the issue for now, without limiting the test coverage, which was a
> concern with having limited scopes for the test.
>
> I've just noticed that in the mean time a way to override the timeout when
> running kselftest has been introduced [2], so I suppose we could use that to
> work around the timeout limitation in CI systems and be able to run through
> completion on the different hardware at the lab. But I still believe, like you
> do, that calculating the timeout at runtime based on the hardware would make
> much more sense, though if there's such a desire to keep kselftests under the
> 45s mark, I'm not sure if it would be acceptable.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/5302e70d-cb58-4e70-b44f-ff81b138a2e1@notapiano/
> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f6a01213e3f8
So, we're back to square... Unless anyone has a strong objection, I'm
inclined to take this as a workaround for 6.5 for now, as the merge
window deadline is coming. We can improve things at the same time for
the future kernel, too.
thanks,
Takashi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-21 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 22:08 [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/alsa: Decrease pcm-test duration to avoid timeouts Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2023-06-20 22:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] kselftest/alsa: pcm-test: Move stream duration and margin to variables Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2023-06-21 9:52 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2023-06-20 22:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] kselftest/alsa: pcm-test: Decrease stream duration from 4 to 2 seconds Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2023-06-21 13:08 ` Mark Brown
2023-06-21 14:08 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2023-06-21 14:39 ` Mark Brown
2023-06-21 16:03 ` Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2023-06-21 16:34 ` Takashi Iwai [this message]
2023-06-21 17:08 ` Mark Brown
2023-06-21 18:13 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-06-21 18:19 ` Mark Brown
2023-07-10 7:00 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-07-12 22:03 ` Mark Brown
2023-07-13 8:47 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-07-13 20:39 ` Mark Brown
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=87352krcz5.wl-tiwai@suse.de \
--to=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nfraprado@collabora.com \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.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