From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Vorel Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 16:05:42 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [Automated-testing] [PATCH 3/4] lib: Introduce concept of max_test_runtime In-Reply-To: References: <20210609114659.2445-1-chrubis@suse.cz> <20210609114659.2445-4-chrubis@suse.cz> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi Cyril, > Hi! > > > - the scaled value is then divided, if needed, so that we end up a > > > correct maximal runtime for an instance of a test, i.e. we have > > > max runtime for an instance fork_testrun() that is inside of > > > .test_variants and .all_filesystems loops > > Now "Max runtime per iteration" can vary, right? I.e. on .all_filesystems > > runtime for each filesystems depends on number of filesystems? E.g. writev03.c > > with setup .timeout = 600 on 2 filesystems is 5 min (300s), but with all 9 > > filesystems is about 1 min. We should document that author should expect max > > number of filesystems. What happen with these values in the (long) future, when > > LTP support new filesystem (or drop some)? This was a reason for me to define in > > the test value for "Max runtime per iteration", not whole run. > That's one of the downsides of this approach. > The reason why I choose this approach is that you can set upper cap for > the whole test run and not only for a single filesystem/variant. > Also this way the test timeout corresponds to the maximal test runtime. > Another option would be to redefine the timeout to be timeout per a > fork_testrun() instance, which would make the approach slightly easier > in some places, however that would mean either changing default test > timeout to much smaller value and annotating all long running tests. IMHO slightly better approach to me. > Hmm, I guess that annotating all long running tests and changing default > timeout may be a good idea regardless this approach. +1 > > > - this also allows us to controll the test max runtime by setting a > > > test timeout > > > * The maximal runtime, per whole test, can be passed down to the test > > > - If LTP_MAX_TEST_RUNTIME is set in test environment it's used as a > > > base for max_runtime instead of the scaled down timeout, it's still > > > divided into pieces so that we have correct runtime cap for an > > > fork_testrun() instance > > LTP_MAX_TEST_RUNTIME should go to doc/user-guide.txt. I suppose you waiting for > > a feedback before writing docs. > Yes I do not consider this to be finished patchset and I do expect that > it would need some changes. Sure. > > > - We also make sure that test timeout is adjusted, if needed, to > > > accomodate for the new test runtime cap, i.e. if upscaled runtime is > > > greater than timeout, the test timeout is adjusted > > > Signed-off-by: Cyril Hrubis > > > --- > > > include/tst_fuzzy_sync.h | 4 +- > > > include/tst_test.h | 7 +- > > > lib/newlib_tests/.gitignore | 3 +- > > > .../{test18.c => test_runtime01.c} | 7 +- > > > lib/newlib_tests/test_runtime02.c | 31 +++++++++ > > > lib/tst_test.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++- > > > testcases/kernel/crypto/af_alg02.c | 2 +- > > > testcases/kernel/crypto/pcrypt_aead01.c | 2 +- > > > testcases/kernel/mem/mtest01/mtest01.c | 6 +- > > > testcases/kernel/mem/mtest06/mmap1.c | 13 ++-- > > > .../kernel/syscalls/move_pages/move_pages12.c | 4 +- > > > 11 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > rename lib/newlib_tests/{test18.c => test_runtime01.c} (59%) > > +1 for test description instead of plain number. > > ... > > > +++ b/lib/newlib_tests/test_runtime01.c > > ... > > > static void run(void) > > > { > > > - do { > > > + while (tst_remaining_runtime()) > > > sleep(1); > > > - } while (tst_timeout_remaining() >= 4); > > > - tst_res(TPASS, "Timeout remaining: %d", tst_timeout_remaining()); > > > + tst_res(TPASS, "Timeout remaining: %d", tst_remaining_runtime()); > > There is a warning: > > tst_test.c:1369: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 00m 05s > > tst_test.c:1265: TWARN: Timeout too short for runtime offset 5! > > tst_test.c:1309: TINFO: runtime > timeout, adjusting test timeout to 6 > > tst_test.c:1318: TINFO: Max runtime per iteration 1s > > test_runtime01.c:15: TPASS: Timeout remaining: 0 > This is expected. > > Maybe test should use value without warning (i.e. 7). > > Or is the warning intended to be the test output? > > .timeout = 6 fails: > > tst_test.c:1369: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 00m 06s > > tst_test.c:1304: TBROK: Test runtime too small! > This is one of the corner cases that probably needs to be handled > differently. +1 ... > > Also test_runtime02.c fails, is that intended? > > tst_test.c:1374: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 00m 05s > > tst_test.c:1265 timeout_to_runtime(): results->timeout: 5 > > tst_test.c:1266 timeout_to_runtime(): RUNTIME_TIMEOUT_OFFSET: 5 > > tst_test.c:1268: TWARN: Timeout too short for runtime offset 5! > > tst_test.c:1314: TINFO: runtime > timeout, adjusting test timeout to 6 > > tst_test.c:1321: TBROK: Test runtime too small! > Yes, this is also supposed to fail, it's written in the test comment as > well... I'm sorry to overlook this. Hope I'll finish test-c-run soon, so that we can continue with expected test output for API tests. Kind regards, Petr