From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] lsmod01.sh: retry test couple times to lower false positives
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:28:26 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <463301336.8732968.1571837306503.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191023121901.GA25868@dell5510>
----- Original Message -----
>
> > - tst_res TPASS "'lsmod' passed."
> > +lsmod_test()
> > +{
> > + for i in $(seq 1 5); do
> > + if lsmod_matches_proc_modules; then
> > + tst_res TPASS "'lsmod' passed."
> > + return
> > + fi
> > + tst_res TINFO "Trying again"
> > + sleep 1
> > + done
> This is similar pattern to TST_RETRY_FUNC()/TST_RETRY_FN_EXP_BACKOFF()
> (for both shell and C). I wonder if we also have use for TPASS/TFAIL
> instead of just TBROK and specifying number of tries instead of time to be
> setup.
I think TFAIL fits more here, it's outcome of what we are testing.
TBROK in my mind is failure unrelated to subject of test.
But functionally TST_RETRY_FUNC should work too.
> C and shell usage is a bit different, so maybe
> TST_RETRY_FUNC()/TST_RETRY_FN_EXP_BACKOFF() doesn't make much sense for shell
I see it used in mkswap01.sh and numa01.sh.
I wonder if we need to TBROK in TST_RETRY_FUNC(). We could just return
what the FUNC returns and let the test decide.
TST_RETRY_FUNC_BRK() could be a wrapper that TBROKs on timeout.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-23 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-18 10:05 [LTP] [PATCH] lsmod01.sh: retry test couple times to lower false positives Jan Stancek
2019-10-18 13:23 ` Petr Vorel
2019-10-18 13:27 ` Jan Stancek
2019-10-18 13:45 ` Petr Vorel
2019-10-22 7:10 ` Jan Stancek
2019-10-23 12:19 ` Petr Vorel
2019-10-23 13:28 ` Jan Stancek [this message]
2019-10-23 18:28 ` Petr Vorel
2019-10-24 4:47 ` Li Wang
2019-10-24 7:49 ` Petr Vorel
2019-10-24 7:12 ` Jan Stancek
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=463301336.8732968.1571837306503.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=jstancek@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