On 05/19, Mina Almasry wrote: > 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.
I don't think that's the expected behavior. Disruptive should not have any effect on other tests if any one fails. Any idea why it happens?
