Thanks for the clarification, Andreas.  Yes, it's a good step; thanks for
doing it.

Steve

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Andreas Hansson via gem5-dev <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> The 00.hello tests are below 10 seconds and have too high SNR to even make
> it into my report :-), so yes you are right in that they are included in
> the ‘short’ regressions.
>
> This is definitely an intermediate step, but in any case we benefit from
> having a more sensible classification.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Andreas
>
> On 22/12/2014 21:21, "Steve Reinhardt via gem5-dev" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Sounds reasonable to me.  I'm not too particular about the naming.
> >
> >I am surprised that even the o3 "hello world" tests wouldn't be < 180
> >seconds though.  It would be nice to have the quick/short/zippy/whatever
> >test category exercise o3 at least a little bit.
> >
> >As far as composing regression paths, I agree it's awkward, but in general
> >I use the util/regress script to run batches of tests, then just
> >copy/paste
> >the ones that fail if I need to re-run them individually.
> >
> >Of course, all this should still be considered merely stopgap until we get
> >a better test system.
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Gabe Black via gem5-dev
> ><[email protected]
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I mean quick, medium, slow, not quick, medium, fast.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Gabe Black <[email protected]>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> > I complained about those names a long time ago, and I still think they
> >> > aren't very good. "quick" and "long" aren't really on the same scale,
> >>to
> >> > start with. Something can be quick (a rate) and still take a long
> >>time.
> >> > Medium is very generic and so isn't on a different axis, but since the
> >> > others aren't lined up it's not as clear as it could be. I would
> >>suggest
> >> > either:
> >> >
> >> > short, medium, long
> >> >
> >> > or
> >> >
> >> > quick, medium, fast
> >> >
> >> > Preferably the first. We have another collection of options the second
> >> > would collide with, namely fast, opt, debug, etc.
> >> >
> >> > If somebody new came along and saw there were fast/quick and opt/long
> >> > regressions, it wouldn't be obvious what that meant. I also think it's
> >> not
> >> > easy to compose one of those regression paths since I can never
> >>remember
> >> > what all the parts are or what order they go in and it's not
> >>documented
> >> > anywhere obvious. That's a separate problem though.
> >> >
> >> > Gabe
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Andreas Hansson via gem5-dev <
> >> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> At the moment we run roughly 120 regressions, and divide them into
> >>quick
> >> >> and long somewhat arbitrarily. Anyone doing active development and
> >>using
> >> >> quick as their “quick” way of checking that nothing is broken has to
> >> wait
> >> >> more than 10 minutes for some of these regressions to finish, which
> >> seems a
> >> >> bit of a stretch. It turns out the actual regression run times
> >>follow an
> >> >> exponential distribution, ranging from a few seconds up to >10k
> >>seconds
> >> >> (almost 3 hours). I propose we also start using medium (mentioned in
> >>a
> >> few
> >> >> places), and use a slightly more structured approach in dividing
> >>them up
> >> >> into quick, medium and long.
> >> >>
> >> >> Here is what I propose:
> >> >>
> >> >> Quick – anything below 180 seconds, resulting in roughly 40
> >>regressions
> >> >> across all ISAs. The turn around for a quick regression run for NULL,
> >> >> ALPHA, ARM and X86 (what I would deem the minimum to run) should
> >>thus be
> >> >> below 5 minutes of wall-clock time. Note that there are plenty
> >> >> configurations not covered by this (o3, realview64 etc).
> >> >>
> >> >> Medium – anything above 180 seconds, but below 1800 seconds, also
> >> >> resulting in roughly 40 regressions.
> >> >>
> >> >> Long – anything >1800 seconds.
> >> >>
> >> >> With this split, quick could be used as part of any development, to
> >>get
> >> >> an indication that everything is ok. For a sensible coverage before
> >> posting
> >> >> any patch, quick and medium should do the job. The cronjobs we have
> >> running
> >> >> at the moment could thus do 'quick,medium' for the daily one, and
> >> >> 'quick,medium,long’ for the weekly one.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts? Ideas? Additional comments?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >>
> >> >> Andreas
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments
> >>are
> >> >> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> >> >> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose
> >>the
> >> >> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or
> >>copy
> >> the
> >> >> information in any medium. Thank you.
> >> >>
> >> >> ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ,
> >> >> Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2557590
> >> >> ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1
> >> 9NJ,
> >> >> Registered in England & Wales, Company No: 2548782
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> gem5-dev mailing list
> >> >> [email protected]
> >> >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> gem5-dev mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >gem5-dev mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
>
> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium.  Thank you.
>
> ARM Limited, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ,
> Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2557590
> ARM Holdings plc, Registered office 110 Fulbourn Road, Cambridge CB1 9NJ,
> Registered in England & Wales, Company No:  2548782
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to