From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59870) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cOFNw-0004Qv-7E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2017 22:03:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cOFNt-0000l2-3s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2017 22:03:36 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60432) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cOFNs-0000kq-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2017 22:03:33 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:03:26 +0800 From: Peter Xu Message-ID: <20170103030326.GC22664@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1483266886-25050-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> <38d74124-eb01-c381-8dd9-2a6334c71fa3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <38d74124-eb01-c381-8dd9-2a6334c71fa3@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/2] run_tests: support concurrent test execution List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Jones , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 06:07:56PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 01/01/2017 11:34, Peter Xu wrote: > > run_tests.sh is getting slower. Maybe it's time to let it run faster. > > An obvious issue is that, we were running the tests sequentially in > > the past. > > > > This series provides another new "-j" parameter. "-j 8" means we run > > the tests on 8 task queues. That'll fasten the script a lot. A very > > quick test of mine shows 3x speed boost with 8 task queues. > > > > Most of the changes are in scripts/tash.bash of patch 2, which > > implemented the main logic for task managements. Please see commit > > message for more information. > > > > I did a quick "make standalone" test to make sure this series won't > > break it. However I am not sure whether it'll break other thing that I > > don't know... > > Would it work if run_tests.sh wrote a Makefile for all the tests (with > phony targets only), and then simply ran "make -f Makefile.tmp -jN"? Would this be a little bit tricky? This version 1 is kind-of overkill (hundreds of lines of codes), I can make it much shorter if you like in v2 according to Radim's suggestion. Thanks, -- peterx