On 17.07.2017 08:35, Fam Zheng wrote: > Hi all, > > Today I've included a fourth type of the automatic patchew replies: FreeBSD. > > So far we have these tests running by patchew on each patch series: > > * Docker tests > Basically it is > make docker-test-quick@centos6 \ > docker-test-build@min-glib \ > docker-test-mingw@fedora" > > * checkpatch.pl > Each patch is fed to ./scripts/checkpatch.pl and all errors are reported. > > * s390x > It runs on a machine shared by Fedora team, basically only "./configure > and > make", because "make check" hanging is tricky to deal with from an > automation perspective. (Ideas?)
Is there any check that could hang "forever"? I think most of the checks should have a proper timeout of one or two minutes, don't they? Maybe you could also simply run the "make check" with the "timeout" command to avoid that it hangs forever? > * FreeBSD > Like s390x. > > Q1: In the worst case, you get four individual auto replies from patchew. Is > that too many? Do you prefer one reply with all the results concatenated into > one? One result would be nicer, I think. > Q2: Some think the full log in the mail body is more than necessary. Is it > better or worse if it is a "tail -n 200" of the log in the body and the full > log > attached? > > Q3: What other tests do maintainers want? Different hosts? Different configure > combinations? Not sure, but should we maybe also check compiling with the configure switches set to non-default values? E.g. --enable-debug --disable-slirp --enable-tcg-interpreter --disable-tcg etc. ? Thomas
