Re: [LTP] [PATCH 2/2] scenario_groups/default: Add irq into default run

["xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com" <xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>]

Hi Cyril
> Hi!
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu<xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    scenario_groups/default | 1 +
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/scenario_groups/default b/scenario_groups/default
>>>> index 439783dac..1dc2987d5 100644
>>>> --- a/scenario_groups/default
>>>> +++ b/scenario_groups/default
>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ dio
>>>>    io
>>>>    mm
>>>>    ipc
>>>> +irq
>>>>    sched
>>>>    math
>>>>    nptl
>>>> --
>>>> 2.23.0
>>>
>>> I'm not sure this should go in the default group at this time. The only
>>> test in irq (irqbalance), only works on some configurations. As
>>> discussed in the test review, the user must figure out if they should
>>> run it or not.
>>
>> It is hard to say moving this case into default run at this time is good
>> or bad.
>>
>> With an optimistic attitude, I want to add it into default run(add some
>> comment in irqbalance01.c that irqbalance01 may fail because it needs
>> some configuration in service or hardware)and then listen whether many
>> users complain about this failure.
>>
>> ps: Many people still use runltp to test ltp instead of runltp-ng and
>> they usually only run default group. That is a important reason that I
>> want to add this case into default group.
>
> Well there are two wrong choices.
>
> If we add it to the default scenario people will complain that the test
> fails for no good reason.
>
> If we do not, the test will be largerly unused and probably bitrot over
> the time.
>
> However if majority here things that we should enable it by default, we
> can try that and revert it if we got too many complaints.
Yes, that's what I was thinking too.

Best Regards
Yang Xu
>

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp