From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
Cc: LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fsync02: restore runtime to 5m
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2022 10:04:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YyLciVc4PpITWYgP@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAASaF6xX=gBBjOVEnp6U4HpjfuzBVpbkyD1i0keW+iVjSCJZWg@mail.gmail.com>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 10:50 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hi Jan, Cyril,
> > > Hi!
> > > > Test allows up to 240 seconds for PASS result (depending if its VM or not),
> > > > but on slower systems library now kills it after a minute. Restore
> > > > runtime to 5 minutes.
> > > Looking at the test itself it's a bit messed up too.
> > > The test uses rand(); to initialize the buffer size but without
> > > initializing the seed which is not random at all. It also uses number of
> > > available disk blocks as a upper limit, which makes the test runtime
> > > completely unpredictable.
> > > I guess that it would make sense to randomize the buffer sizes but in
> > > certain bounds to make the test more predictable and print the numbers
> > > we are going to use too. Maybe run the test with a few different sizes
> > > and time limits. Maybe the size of the buffers can be function of the
> > > test runtime.
> > > All in all I think that we should really rething what we are doing here
> > > since the current code does not make that much sense to me.
> > Jan, do you plan to do anything with the test before the release?
> I put it at todo list, but haven't dived into it yet. For release, I'd
> go with timelimit
> extension as that can't cause any regressions.
Make sense to me.
Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
Kind regards,
Petr
> > Kind regards,
> > Petr
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > testcases/kernel/syscalls/fsync/fsync02.c | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fsync/fsync02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fsync/fsync02.c
> > > > index e13ba89f1b63..55c7a71c1d65 100644
> > > > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fsync/fsync02.c
> > > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/fsync/fsync02.c
> > > > @@ -114,5 +114,6 @@ static struct tst_test test = {
> > > > .test_all = run,
> > > > .setup = setup,
> > > > .cleanup = cleanup,
> > > > - .needs_tmpdir = 1
> > > > + .needs_tmpdir = 1,
> > > > + .max_runtime = 300,
> > > > };
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-15 8:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-20 10:43 [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fsync02: restore runtime to 5m Jan Stancek
2022-07-20 11:56 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-09-14 20:50 ` Petr Vorel
2022-09-15 6:39 ` Jan Stancek
2022-09-15 8:04 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2022-09-15 15:05 ` Cyril Hrubis
2022-09-16 9:03 ` 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=YyLciVc4PpITWYgP@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=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