05.05.2019 18:54, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 03/05/2019 18.15, Alex Bennée wrote: >> >> Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> On 03/05/2019 16.39, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>> This attempts to clean-up the output to better match the output of the >>>> rest of the QEMU check system. This includes: >>>> >>>> - formatting as " TEST iotest: nnn" >>>> - calculating time diff at the end >>>> - only dumping config on failure >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> >>>> --- >>>> tests/qemu-iotests/check | 71 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------- >>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) >>> >>> Thanks for tackling this! The output now looks nicer indeed if you run >>> "make check-qtest check-block -j8". However, if you add a "V=1" at the >>> end of the command line, the outputs look quite different again... >>> >>> That's why I thought that having a TAP mode for the check script could >>> be a good idea, too. Then we could pipe the output through the >>> tap-driver.pl script, too, so we get uniform output for all tests...? >> >> That would probably be a cleaner approach. What would be even better is >> somehow expanding the list of tests at make time so you could run your >> tests in parallel. > > I agree that this might be the ultimate solution ... but I'm not sure > whether the iotests are really ready for being run in parallel yet, so > it will likely take quite some while 'till we are at that point. With > that in mind (and thus also not sure yet whether my TAP idea is really > the right approach), your patch is certainly a good interim solution > which we should try to get merged, too, when my "make check" series gets > accepted? > >> I did wonder how useful the timing stuff was to developers. > > Yes, me too ... maybe the block layer folks can comment on that one...? > > Thomas >
Hi! It was useful to not miss performance degradation (1) and to understand that test hangs (2) (if you know that it should finish in 1 second, but 10 seconds already passed, the test most probably hangs) Run tests with your patch: first run: # check -qcow2 -T TEST iotest: 001 [20:00:30] -> [20:00:31] TEST iotest: 002 [20:00:31] -> [20:00:33] TEST iotest: 003 [20:00:33] -> [20:00:34] TEST iotest: 004 [20:00:34] -> [20:00:35] TEST iotest: 005 [20:00:35] -> [20:00:36] TEST iotest: 007 [20:00:36] -> [20:00:39] second run: # check -qcow2 -T TEST iotest: 001 [20:00:41] -> [20:00:43] 2s (last 1s) TEST iotest: 002 [20:00:43] -> [20:00:44] 1s (last 2s) TEST iotest: 003 [20:00:44] -> [20:00:46] 2s (last 1s) TEST iotest: 004 [20:00:46] -> [20:00:46] 0s (last 1s) TEST iotest: 005 [20:00:46] -> [20:00:47] 1s (last 1s) TEST iotest: 007 [20:00:47] -> [20:00:50] 3s (last 3s) TEST iotest: 008 [20:00:50] -> [20:00:51] TEST iotest: 009 [20:00:51] -> [20:00:51] TEST iotest: 010 [20:00:51] -> [20:00:51] So, in first run delta was not calculated and on second - calculated. Could you calculate delta in all cases, to make first run look like # check -qcow2 -T TEST iotest: 001 [20:00:30] -> [20:00:31] 1s TEST iotest: 002 [20:00:31] -> [20:00:33] 2s TEST iotest: 003 [20:00:33] -> [20:00:34] 1s TEST iotest: 004 [20:00:34] -> [20:00:35] 1s TEST iotest: 005 [20:00:35] -> [20:00:36] 1s TEST iotest: 007 [20:00:36] -> [20:00:39] 3s -- Best regards, Vladimir
