From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49738C54798 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 00:47:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154E23D1C19 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 01:47:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96BE73CB8D1 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 01:47:12 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-2.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2; helo=smtp-out2.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17E5461DF1E for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2024 01:47:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org [10.150.64.98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ED2066F78; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 22:08:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1709849280; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=i9V4zJiMggYiEfa2nWhVo0CmQMW/H4b78jxELRcmdf8=; b=UbNaDETuVfGLfExPKxPYD2UI/bzGA6bAw13+PtzRpD8Zo6kr/sN1w9qr93J7c576JrgxgJ ZemhPWMVwFRvToZozCO0tUvsujPvmMrp1XxeD6X3OhSOc+J1QNPpC/i13FY7npaBejunbl zTp94pgYb6HoJetP1I5zvpyMyRyIOzA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1709849280; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=i9V4zJiMggYiEfa2nWhVo0CmQMW/H4b78jxELRcmdf8=; b=U+De2LyI6lhMQ4akD0YODOEBnOCFUvV31i9tFcAIJixukt0ahn3zi5ipU5buOrBq/urHK/ 5feWK+6ADB3AEHAw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1709849280; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=i9V4zJiMggYiEfa2nWhVo0CmQMW/H4b78jxELRcmdf8=; b=UbNaDETuVfGLfExPKxPYD2UI/bzGA6bAw13+PtzRpD8Zo6kr/sN1w9qr93J7c576JrgxgJ ZemhPWMVwFRvToZozCO0tUvsujPvmMrp1XxeD6X3OhSOc+J1QNPpC/i13FY7npaBejunbl zTp94pgYb6HoJetP1I5zvpyMyRyIOzA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1709849280; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=i9V4zJiMggYiEfa2nWhVo0CmQMW/H4b78jxELRcmdf8=; b=U+De2LyI6lhMQ4akD0YODOEBnOCFUvV31i9tFcAIJixukt0ahn3zi5ipU5buOrBq/urHK/ 5feWK+6ADB3AEHAw== Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A150E132A4; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 22:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([10.150.64.162]) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id ablVI7866mWlOwAAn2gu4w (envelope-from ); Thu, 07 Mar 2024 22:07:59 +0000 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 23:07:57 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Andrea Cervesato Message-ID: <20240307220757.GB211890@pevik> References: <20240216122904.11446-1-andrea.cervesato@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-7.50 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v1] Rewrite msgstress testing suite X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hi! > On 3/7/24 12:33, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > > Hi! > > First of all this patch removes all users of the libltpipc library but > > keeps the library orphaned in libs/ leaving a dead code. > This was done by purpose. I have track of dependences inside LTP and the > idea is to remove it on a second moment. But I can send a following patch > removing it already. Actually, if it was done on purpose it is a bad approach. Splitting a cleanup from a rewrite is asking to leave a dead code. > > Secondly if you look at the libmsgctl.c you can actually see that the > > reader and writer pair sends messages in a loop. This is imporatant > > because without that the test can be hardly called a stress test. The > > point is to start as much processes as possible that keep sending > > messages around so that eventually we saturate the system. The new test > > just sends a single message, which means that the children finish too > > quickly and we never run more than a single digit of read/write pairs. > > Given that we now have a runtime support in the test library we should > > change this so that the reader/write paris continue to send messages > > around until we are out of runtime. And the runtime should be at least a > > minute. > Actually this is a good idea, but test might send not enough messages if > system is not responsive. > I would keep the loop like we do now in this case, so we ensure a certain > amount of stress, no matter the runtime. I would agree with Cyril this is not much stressing (rewrite should not drop the main purpose of the test). ... > > > - tst_resm(TPASS, "Test ran successfully!"); > > > + tst_res(TPASS, "Received correct data"); > > This spams the test output with a few hundreds of lines of output, which > > is known to choke test runners. For this case we should probably output > > one single TPASS at the end of the test. Can't we exit child non-zero on failure, store that via WIFEXITED() and print TPASS only when none of the child runs failed? > > Also this seems to be a common pattern, so we may as well add a function > > into the test library that would produce TPASS unless we have seen a > > FAIL/BROK/WARN. Or maybe just a function that would return sum of the > > result counters so that we can do: > > if (tst_get_res(TFAIL|TBROK|TWARN)) > > tst_res(TPASS, "All data were received correctly"); This looks to me better approach than expect that the default is to TPASS. > Isn't it like this already? No, it TBROK if you don't produce any of TPASS/TFAIL/TBROK/TCONF (TBROK can be only in tst_brk()): tst_test.c:1472: TBROK: Test 0 haven't reported results! Kind regards, Petr > Regards, > Andrea -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp