On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 09:33:22AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 16:37:02 -0300
> Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > + TestData data = { .ram_size = 128 };
> > >
> > > - if (strcmp(arch, "aarch64") == 0) {
> > > - args = "-machine virt";
> > > + if (!strcmp(arch, "aarch64")) {
> > > + data.args = "-machine virt";
> > > + } else if (!strcmp(arch, "ppc64")) {
> > > + data.ram_size = 512;
> >
> > Wouldn't it be simpler to always use "-m 512M" and the same node
> > sizes?
> it would, but it might make some CI instances start failing more
> often where it used to work before. So I picked side of being
> conservative and not to hog memory unless it's necessary.
I don't understand. Why would "-m 512M" make some CI instances
start failing more often?
--
Eduardo
