Linux Test Project
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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