From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33029) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkQPp-0000SC-6K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 03:49:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkQPl-0005iy-V7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 03:49:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44494) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dkQPl-0005iZ-Lo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 03:49:25 -0400 References: <20170816082650.21880-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <223c4e3c-097f-5a91-37fa-df4bfb427d60@redhat.com> <20170822010917.GO12356@umbus.fritz.box> <3f0dc918-0f55-e2f4-bf47-fe4abf5453bb@redhat.com> <20170822112046.GC12356@umbus.fritz.box> <20170822134815.77020eb8.cohuck@redhat.com> <20170823002907.GC5379@umbus.fritz.box> <20170823091650.48e7c44e.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <54526d47-b436-79d5-7a38-9516eaa727a6@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 09:49:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170823091650.48e7c44e.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Qemu-devel] make check speed (was: Re: [PATCH for-2.10] boot-serial-test: prefer tcg accelerator) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck , David Gibson Cc: Peter Maydell , Laurent Vivier , Paolo Bonzini , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Richard Henderson , QEMU Developers On 23.08.2017 09:16, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 10:29:07 +1000 > David Gibson wrote: >=20 >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 01:48:15PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 21:20:46 +1000 >>> David Gibson wrote: >>> =20 >>>> Obviously it's not a thing to fix right now, but I've really been >>>> thinking that none of the tests should use this "TCG or KVM" stuff. >>>> They should instead be run with *both* options - or at least the one= s >>>> that are available on the host. =20 >>> >>> Having one test as a 'smoke test' that is run for everything availabl= e >>> sounds like a good idea, and the boot-serial test may be a good >>> candidate for that. >>> >>> I would not want to run every test with every accelerator, however, a= s >>> this makes 'make check' even slower than it is now. (Although it may = be >>> useful to be able to trigger 'run everything' tests on some dedicated >>> test machines.) =20 >> >> I'd be fine with only running the full matrix on a "make check-harder" >> or whatever, target. But I'd like the option to be there. Sometimes >> (like when preparing a pull request) a slower check is an acceptable >> cost for better coverage. >=20 > make check with one smoke test + make check-harder (like the name :) > sounds like a good combination. While we're at it: I'd like to have a "make check-fast", too. Sometimes the normal "make check" is already too slow, e.g. while developing new patches, I sometimes just want to do a very quick sanity test to see whether I broke some basic things or not, and only do the "make check" before I submit my patches. So we would get three stages: - make check-fast =3D> For very, very quick sanity tests only - make check =3D> E.g. has to be run before submitting patches - make check-harder =3D> might run a very long time, so best suited for nightly regression tests etc.? Does that sound reasonable? And the crucial question: Who is going to implement the basic framework for this? Thomas