From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: shuah.kh@samsung.com
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, keescook@chromium.org,
michael@ellerman.id.au, fweisbec@gmail.com,
benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: selftests - create a separate hotplug target
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:04:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140627130411.d351b6543787b826f5ba1b34@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53ADCD3B.3000209@samsung.com>
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:59:55 -0600 Shuah Khan <shuah.kh@samsung.com> wrote:
> > I don't know really. You know more about this than I - what advantages
> > does the separate-make-target approach have over this approach?
> >
>
> Currently these tests run with full range - i.e try to offline
> all cpus that are hotpluggable and try to offline all memory
> that is hotpluggable. This results in hangs.
>
> Creating a separate target the way I did it in this patch excludes these
> tests all together. i.e when somebody runs:
>
> make -C tools/testing/selftests run_tests
>
> hotplug tests don't run.
>
> Instead, with a few changes, tests can be run with a reduced scope so
> a % of the memory gets offlined as opposed to all of it and the same
> thing with cpus. This way hotplug code gets tested as opposed to
> being excluded in a default test run case.
>
> However, if limited scope testing isn't useful, separate target is
> better until tests can be made safe to run without hangs.
hm, OK. So it sounds like the best solution would be to run the
limited tests by default and to require special intervention to run the
full tests.
I guess a separate make target is a suitable way of running the full
tests. We could use an environment variable or various other things.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-27 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-26 20:33 Shuah Khan
2014-06-26 21:51 ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-27 17:10 ` Shuah Khan
2014-06-27 19:45 ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-27 19:59 ` Shuah Khan
2014-06-27 20:04 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140627130411.d351b6543787b826f5ba1b34@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=shuah.kh@samsung.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®