qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
Cc: "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
	"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests: improve performance of device-introspect-test
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:59:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200709115906.GM3753300@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b401730-4a54-d42f-a069-2125bd71e1f1@redhat.com>

On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 01:44:45PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> On 09/07/2020 13:28, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > Total execution time with "-m slow" and x86_64 QEMU, drops from 3
> > minutes 15 seconds, down to 54 seconds.
> > 
> > Individual tests drop from 17-20 seconds, down to 3-4 seconds.
> > 
> > The cost of this change is that any QOM bugs resulting in the test
> > failure will not be directly associated with the device that caused
> > the failure. The test case is not frequently identifying such bugs
> > though, and the cause is likely easily visible in the patch series
> > that causes the failure. So overall the shorter running time is
> > considered the more important factor.
> 
> You don't report the test to test_device_intro_none() and
> test_device_intro_abstract(): is it intended ?

Since neither of those tests will result in any device being created there
didn't seem any point in chceking the qtree output.

IIUC, both of those tests should result in an error being reported from
the device_add command, but I see nothing actually validates that is the
case. 

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|



  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-09 12:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-09 11:28 [PATCH] tests: improve performance of device-introspect-test Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-09 11:44 ` Laurent Vivier
2020-07-09 11:59   ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2020-07-09 12:14     ` Laurent Vivier
2020-07-09 16:18       ` Markus Armbruster
2020-07-10 20:03 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-07-12 18:43   ` Thomas Huth
2020-07-13  8:47   ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-14  7:57     ` Markus Armbruster

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=20200709115906.GM3753300@redhat.com \
    --to=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=philmd@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).