On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 8:25 AM Stanislav Fomichev <stfomic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 05/19, Mina Almasry wrote: > > As far as I can tell the ksft_disruptive here is unnecessary. These > > tests are largerly independent, and when one test fails, it's nice to > > know the results from all the other test cases. > > We currently don't do anything special for disruptive tests. I'm assuming > anything that changes nic configuration is disruptive and was thinking of > an option to run all disruptive tests at the end of the run. But so far we > haven't had any problem with mixing disruptive and non-disruptive tests, > so it's all moot. I'd prefer to keep everything as is for now (or remove > this whole disruptive category).
I've noticed that if all the tests are marked disruptive, and one test fails, the others don't run at all, which seems unnecessary. I'd like to see if the rx test passed if the tx one failed and vice versa for example. Removing the disruptive tag seems to resolve that. dmabuf bind is automatically unbound when ncdevmem exits, so i don't think these tests leave the nic in a bad state or anything that warrants blocking running the other tests? -- Thanks, Mina
