From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/1] lib: Multiply slow config only for a real tests
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:16:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250117091603.GA742253@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEemH2c82HAwMdWJ7a5WPLzHTJWA-dhunXuJQdt4WK4zWdpPYg@mail.gmail.com>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 4:41 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
TL;DR: wrong patch, please ignore it.
...
> > +static inline int foo(unsigned int timeout)
> What is the foo() used for?
I'm sorry, I noticed this after sending as well. But got slow down due
TST_NO_DEFAULT_MAIN in tst_test.c as well.
> > +static inline int tst_multiply_on_slow_config(unsigned int timeout)
> > +{
> > +#ifndef TST_NO_DEFAULT_MAIN
> > + if (tst_has_slow_kconfig())
> > + timeout *= 4;
> > +#endif /* TST_NO_DEFAULT_MAIN */
> > + return timeout;
> > +}
> But the tst_test.c has defined the TST_NO_DEFAULT_MAIN macro
> so it will go complie with the second branch always.
> IOW, the tst_has_slow_kconfig() will never be performed.
Yes, you're right this would not work (it took me a while to find it as well).
I hoped we would have some smart evaluation which would allow not having to add
anything to files in testcases/lib/, but this will not work.
We can either combine your approach with this (have a new definition + static
function in tst_test.h) or use struct tst_test flag as Andrea suggested. I'm not
sure what is better, I slightly preferred the definition, because one day we
might want to get rid of struct tst_test workarounds in testcases/lib therefore
I would prefer not to add yet another.
FYI tst_test struct use is forced by code in safe_clone() lib/tst_test.c:
pid_t safe_clone(const char *file, const int lineno,
const struct tst_clone_args *args)
{
pid_t pid;
if (!tst_test->forks_child)
tst_brk(TBROK, "test.forks_child must be set!");
This could be also guarded by new definition. Then it should have probably a
different name than TST_NO_SLOW_KCONFIG_CHECK. Sure, we postpone this cleanup
after the release.
BTW we have TCONF on starvation.c. This test would work if we don't prolong it
even longer with tst_has_slow_kconfig(), thus might want to remove TCONF and
disable tst_has_slow_kconfig() there as well. We can do it with both ways.
Kind regards,
Petr
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-17 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-17 8:41 [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/1] lib: Multiply slow config only for a real tests Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 8:55 ` Li Wang
2025-01-17 9:16 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2025-01-17 9:26 ` Li Wang
2025-01-17 9:34 ` Li Wang
2025-01-17 9:40 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 9:57 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:14 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 10:28 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:31 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 10:51 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:55 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:18 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 10:30 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 11:47 ` Petr Vorel
2025-01-17 12:07 ` Cyril Hrubis
2025-01-17 12:21 ` Li Wang
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=20250117091603.GA742253@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=liwang@redhat.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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