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 2E2D5E9B258 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:47:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EBC73D0F8C for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 12:47:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-7.smtp.seeweb.it (in-7.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DC5E3D0F6E for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 12:46:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) (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-7.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FB402005F9 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 12:46:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (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-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 784003F1CD; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:46:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none Received: from imap1.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 imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30BCD3EA68; Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:46:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id KXAHCa6PnWljHAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:46:54 +0000 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 12:46:52 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: <20260224114652.GA48499@pevik> References: <20260221135338.26236-2-sebastian.chlad@suse.com> <20260222203442.GB417048@pevik> <20260224093820.GA37927@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 784003F1CD X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd1.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.9 at in-7.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] nfs: Adapt the lib to allow to test in 2-host mode 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: Martin Doucha , ltp@lists.linux.it, Sebastian Chlad 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! > > > And with that we would need some kind of "master file" that would > > > explain which script should be executed on which host etc. But I guess > > > that it would be tricky to desing this properly. > > I'm not sure if separated file is worth of adding. There is tst_rhost_run() > > function which should be used for checking, which works well on both netns and 2 > > host based setup (that's why v2). > This is just me thinking if we can actually desing something more proper > in the future now that runltp is gone. I think that the whole > tst_rhost_run() infrastructure is a bit of a hack and that the > multimachine test can be desingned differently. I would say that more > proper solution would be to have the test split into one script per > worker and having some master script/description to drive the testing. > The testrunner would read the information about which script to run on > which worker and would also have to handle synchronization. FYI tst_rhost_run() is used for testing itself as well, more than for setup and cleanup: $ git grep -l tst_rhost_run |wc -l 35 Therefore we can rethink network test setup, but tst_rhost_run() will be needed anyway. > In the case of the NFS tests the master script would say to run a script > that sets up NFS server and signal the testrunner once it's done and > wait. The script that would be doing the actuall test would be executed > once the the NFS server script to signaled it's completion and then > start the actual test. Once it's finished testing it would exit, which > would tell the testrunner to wake up the NFS server script in order to > cleanup. If we decided to write multimachine tests this way we would > need to add a way how to pass parameters such as IP addresses from kirk > to tests and also add a way how to propagate events between tests via > kirk so that we can have some kind of locking. Also, you call it a hack, but it works standalone, without any runner. I would be careful to add kirk as a hard dependency to run a single test without a strong reason (sure, using kirk to handle metadata to run tests in paralel or replace runtest files will be a great improvement, but I would like to still keep executing a test itself by just calling it with proper PATH setup). FYI "multimachine tests": I know only about 1 test which needs more than a single machine: IPsec (implemented in openQA instead of LTP [1]). Kind regards, Petr [1] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/920 -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp