From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Clemens Famulla-Conrad Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:16:37 +0000 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] memcg_stress_test.sh: Respect LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL set by user In-Reply-To: References: <20190829181146.20261-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20190830085036.GA27453@dell5510> <9e518589-9c98-1513-2c19-bae0268b8a81@arm.com> <20190830104609.GA9330@dell5510> <1568279073.3621.12.camel@suse.de> Message-ID: <1568283397.3621.23.camel@suse.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 10:55 +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Hi > > > Hmm, what we want to do is: > > > > If a testcase needs timeout value is larger than the default (300 > > sec), we > > could only define a variable LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN in the test, then > > the > > _tst_setup_timer() will detect if LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN is valid and > > reset > > the minimum time for the test. > > > > @Petr and @Cristian, If I misunderstand anything, please correct > > me. > > my understanding was that: > > - we should already be able to set a non default per-test timeout > using > the existing global LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL (and we are) > > - in this test we hardcoded such LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL to 7 because is the > minimum sane > value for this test (less than 7 and it fails 100%) > > - we want to allow again the user to specify its own LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL > if he wants > BUT also being able to enforce on a test by test basis a MINIMUM > allowed value: > so we would define LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN=7 here, and then a user > would be free to > run LTP with a different global LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL but when running > this test > > + if LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL < LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN ===> use local > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN > + if LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL >= LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN ===> use global > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL > > This way you don't break specific tests' needs while allowing the > user to global reduce > run-time....now basically the user cannot enforce a higher timeout on > this test > using the global LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL even if it should be allowed to > since this wouldn't > break the test. > > ...unless I misunderstood too o_O :D Thanks for explaining. That's how I understood the idea of LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN, too. But what I understood from current "c" approach is: We have a fixed (minimal) timeout value, specified in (struct tst_test*)->timeout, which can be adjusted by user with environment variable TST_TIMEOUT_MUL. This behavior is missing in shell. And if we now introduce a LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN, it doesn't make much sense, cause we have already a timeout min. So I think, we only need something to specify the default minimum timeout in seconds for shell (like we already do in c) and we are done. Thanks Clemens