While working on the "boot_linux_console.py" tests, after a given rebase, I noticed that the ppc64 specific test began timing out. The original timeout set to the test was 60 seconds, and it "always" had room to spare when running either on my system, or on Travis CI.
Then, Alex mentioned that specific test timing out on his "slow" system[1]. I did some further investigation and found out that commit f7b78602f might have been responsible for a significant slowdown, and maybe was also affecting his execution. Getting straight to the point, this is the ppc64 "boot linux console" test, running 10 times, on top my latest rebase (e8977901b, that includes f7b78602f). ... (01/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (63.07 s) (02/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (64.00 s) (03/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (62.93 s) (04/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (64.01 s) (05/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (63.13 s) (06/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (64.65 s) (07/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (63.25 s) (08/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (66.77 s) (09/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (65.07 s) (10/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (63.55 s) ... The exact branch I used for the results above can be seen at: - https://github.com/clebergnu/qemu/tree/regression_tcg_ppc64 Then, with f7b78602f reverted: (01/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.54 s) (02/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (21.06 s) (03/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.81 s) (04/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (21.00 s) (05/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.37 s) (06/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.40 s) (07/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.36 s) (08/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.39 s) (09/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.39 s) (10/10) boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (20.38 s) The exact branch I used for the results above can be seen at: - https://github.com/clebergnu/qemu/tree/regression_tcg_ppc64_revert Even though there's a lot more noise involved, similar results can be seen on Travis-CI: - https://travis-ci.org/clebergnu/qemu/builds/487607293#L3035 (04/16) /home/travis/build/clebergnu/qemu/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (22.21 s) - https://travis-ci.org/clebergnu/qemu/builds/487606849#L3035 (04/16) /home/travis/build/clebergnu/qemu/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_pseries: PASS (11.27 s) The reasons for the extra noise include: 1) Those tests download the kernel images 2) They are run only once 3) They run on shared infrastructure Based on Travis-CI runs alone, it's hard to determine if there was any other significant regression (or improvement?) for other targets. I'm posting this early, but if I come up with more relevant information, follow up here. Regards, - Cleber. --- [1] - https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg589497.html
