On 08/05/2019 07.47, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 07/05/2019 17.50, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 5/7/19 10:22 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> On 07/05/2019 15.22, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Currently, all tests are in the "auto" group. This is a little bit >>>>> pointless. >>>>> OTOH, we need a group for the tests that we can automatically run during >>>>> "make check" each time, too. Tests in this new group are supposed to run >>>>> with every possible QEMU configuration, for example they must run with >>>>> every >>>>> QEMU binary (also non-x86), without failing when an optional features is >>>>> missing (but reporting "skip" is ok), and be able to run on all kind of >>>>> host >>>>> filesystems and users (i.e. also as "nobody" or "root"). >>>>> So let's use the "auto" group for this class of tests now. The initial >>>>> list has been determined by running the iotests with non-x86 QEMU targets >>>>> and with our CI pipelines on Gitlab, Cirrus-CI and Travis (i.e. including >>>>> macOS and FreeBSD). >>>> >>>> I wonder whether we should additionally limit "make check" to "quick" >>>> tests. How slow are the non-quick auto tests for you? >>> >>> I already sorted out some of the tests that run veeeery long, since the >>> run time on gitlab, cirrus-ci and travis is limited. "make check-block" >>> currently takes 3 minutes on my laptop, I think that's still ok? >>> >>> When I run the tests from the auto group that are not in the quick >>> group, I currently get: >>> >> >> My personal threshold is about 5 seconds for quick, so: >> >>> 003 1s ... >>> 007 2s ... >> >> Should these be moved to quick? > > I'll leave that decision up to the blocklayer folks ... I thought that > there might have been a different reason that these have not been put > into "quick" yet...? > >>> 013 5s ... >> >> this one is borderline >> >>> 014 15s ... >>> 015 9s ... >> >> Definitely not quick, but if you think they are still okay for auto, I >> can live with that. >> >>> 022 1s ... >> >> Another candidate for quick? >> >>> 023 18s ... >> >> Even longer than 14. Okay for auto? > > I think I'd give it a try. If people are complaining later that "make > check" is running now way too long, we still can refine the list later.
Thinking about this again, "make check" now runs quite a bit longer indeed. So I now rather tend to remove the tests that run longer than 5s from the auto group instead... I think I'll send a v4 of this patch where I'll remove them from the auto group. Thomas