Patchwork Increase timeout in nss/bug17079.c test

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Chung-Lin Tang
Date Jan. 22, 2016, 7:16 a.m.
Message ID <56A1D734.8000709@codesourcery.com>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/10516/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Chung-Lin Tang - Jan. 22, 2016, 7:16 a.m.
Hi, I would like to increase the timeout for the nss/bug17079.c test,
as this one runs for quite some time on Nios II Linux.
Ok to commit?

Thanks,
Chung-Lin

	* nss/bug17079.c (TIMEOUT): Define as 100.
Mike Frysinger - Jan. 22, 2016, 7:56 p.m.
On 22 Jan 2016 16:16, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> Hi, I would like to increase the timeout for the nss/bug17079.c test,
> as this one runs for quite some time on Nios II Linux.
> Ok to commit?

how long did it actually take to run ?  100 seems like "just a big number
that we didn't hit" vs "the test took 90 seconds on my platform".
-mike
Chung-Lin Tang - Jan. 24, 2016, 7:41 a.m.
On 2016/1/23 4:56 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 22 Jan 2016 16:16, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
>> Hi, I would like to increase the timeout for the nss/bug17079.c test,
>> as this one runs for quite some time on Nios II Linux.
>> Ok to commit?
> 
> how long did it actually take to run ?  100 seems like "just a big number
> that we didn't hit" vs "the test took 90 seconds on my platform".
> -mike
> 

It takes around 77~80 seconds on the nios2 board we have, so I rounded up
and took 100. It was a number from a measured experiment, not a blind guess.

Chung-Lin
Mike Frysinger - Feb. 10, 2016, 5:23 a.m.
On 24 Jan 2016 16:41, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> On 2016/1/23 4:56 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 22 Jan 2016 16:16, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> >> Hi, I would like to increase the timeout for the nss/bug17079.c test,
> >> as this one runs for quite some time on Nios II Linux.
> >> Ok to commit?
> > 
> > how long did it actually take to run ?  100 seems like "just a big number
> > that we didn't hit" vs "the test took 90 seconds on my platform".
> 
> It takes around 77~80 seconds on the nios2 board we have, so I rounded up
> and took 100. It was a number from a measured experiment, not a blind guess.

mostly just curious.  patch is fine.  thanks !
-mike
Carlos O'Donell - Feb. 11, 2016, 3:58 p.m.
On 01/22/2016 02:16 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> Hi, I would like to increase the timeout for the nss/bug17079.c test,
> as this one runs for quite some time on Nios II Linux.
> Ok to commit?
> 
> Thanks,
> Chung-Lin
> 
> 	* nss/bug17079.c (TIMEOUT): Define as 100.
> 
> 
> bug17079.c.diff
> 
> 
> diff --git a/nss/bug17079.c b/nss/bug17079.c
> index 367daae..3f9ec54 100644
> --- a/nss/bug17079.c
> +++ b/nss/bug17079.c
> @@ -240,5 +240,6 @@ do_test (void)
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> +#define TIMEOUT 100
>  #define TEST_FUNCTION do_test ()
>  #include "../test-skeleton.c"

Patch is OK if you add a comment to the likes of:

/* Nios II Linux targets routinely take 77~80 seconds
   to complete this test.  */

I assume you are able to push this yourself?

Cheers,
Carlos.
Joseph Myers - Feb. 11, 2016, 4:47 p.m.
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> Patch is OK if you add a comment to the likes of:
> 
> /* Nios II Linux targets routinely take 77~80 seconds
>    to complete this test.  */

But I doubt this issue is anything to do with Nios II; referencing it 
there is just silly.  I think it's the combination of slow processor with 
large user database (and the time depends on both user database size and 
processor speed).

Patch

diff --git a/nss/bug17079.c b/nss/bug17079.c
index 367daae..3f9ec54 100644
--- a/nss/bug17079.c
+++ b/nss/bug17079.c
@@ -240,5 +240,6 @@  do_test (void)
     return 0;
 }
 
+#define TIMEOUT 100
 #define TEST_FUNCTION do_test ()
 #include "../test-skeleton.c"