Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:09:58 +0200 | From | Andrew Jones <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/10] ktest: Introduce PASS_COUNT |
| |
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:49:45PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 15:32 +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: > > Add another config variable that defines the number of times a test > > must pass before it really passes. This is good for boot tests, where > > the failure doesn't occur every time. > > I'm curious to how this is really different than the ITERATE keyword. > > That is, if we had: > > TEST_START ITERATE 10 > TEST_TYPE = test > TEST = ssh root@box "/work/runtest" > > Hmm, is this to help in the bisects?
Right. I played with ITERATE, but it didn't look like it would work for bisecting boot problems that may fail once in some number of boots. Perhaps I missed something though.
> > Maybe it should be called ITERATE as well, just to be consistent. > > TEST_START > TEST_TYPE = bisect > ITERATE = 10 > > ?? > > Or maybe that is confusing too, as that could be used to do the iterate > within the TEST_START (hmm, I may add that). > > How about PASS_THRESHOLD? or PASS_COUNT_THRESHOLD? As I think that may > be more descriptive.
PASS_THRESHOLD sounds good. Should I respin with that change now? Or are you still considering a different design?
> > /me rereads his email and sees that he has a tendency to talk to > himself. >
/me wonders if he answered himself with a different design idea, so will hold off on the updated patch for the moment.
Drew > > -- Steve > >
| |