From: Subrata Modak <subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>,
LTP <ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net>,
amrith <amrith@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [LTP] realtime measurement tests: approach to criteria
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:38:02 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1249387682.15587.32.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A7772FE.20808@us.ibm.com>
Hi Darren,
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 16:30 -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> The current ltp/testcases/realtime tests belong to one of func, perf, or
> stress. While strict pass/fail criteria make sense for functional tests
> (did the tasks wake up in priority order?), the others use "arbitrary"
> values and compare those against the whatever is being measured (wakeup
> latency, etc.) and then determine pass/fail. Ideally the tests
> themselves would not determine the pass/fail criteria, and would instead
> simply report on their measurements since the criteria will vary in
> every use-case based on requirements, workload, hardware, etc.
>
> I'd like to propose an approach where the tests only report their
> measured values (with the exception of the func/* tests which will
> maintain their pass/fail criteria). Users should be able to populate a
> criteria.conf file that specified the criteria of each test. The
> results could then be parsed, compared against the results, and a
> pass/fail determined from there. I suspect it would be best for the .c
> tests to just report the numbers and the statistics in a common format
> and rely on python parser scripts to read the config file and determine
> pass/fail from there.
>
> I'd like users thoughts on this approach before we jump in and start
> changing things (as this is a fairly invasive change).
This is indeed a good approach. Should we also ask the RT-USERS, who
might be interested to comment on this ?
Regards--
Subrata
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-04 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-03 23:30 [LTP] realtime measurement tests: approach to criteria Darren Hart
2009-08-04 12:08 ` Subrata Modak [this message]
2009-08-04 14:28 ` Darren Hart
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=1249387682.15587.32.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com \
--to=subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=amrith@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=williams@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