On 17/02/2024 00:31, SeongJae Park wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the
content is safe.
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 16:01:20 -0800 Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 05:13:09PM -0800, SeongJae Park wrote:
A gentle reminder.
Thanks,
SJ
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 09:42:43 -0800 SeongJae Park <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 10:30:38 +0000 "Mohamed Abuelfotoh, Hazem"
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 08/02/2024 21:29, SeongJae Park wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the
content is safe.
While mq_perf_tests runs with the default kselftest timeout limit, which
is 45 seconds, the test takes about 60 seconds to complete on i3.metal
AWS instances. Hence, the test always times out. Increase the timeout
to 100 seconds.
Fixes: 852c8cbf34d3 ("selftests/kselftest/runner.sh: Add 45 second timeout per
test")
Cc: <[email protected]> # 5.4.x
Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
b/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..54dc12287839
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mqueue/setting
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+timeout=100
--
2.39.2
Added Vijai Kumar to CC
This looks similar to [PATCH] kselftest: mqueue: increase timeout
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/T/#r12820aede6bba015b70ae33323e29ae27d5b69c7
which was increasing the timeout to 180 however it's not clear why this
hasn't been merged yet.
Should it be 100 or 180?
Both options may work, I am more inclined to have this as 180 seconds by
giving more time for the test to finish, this can be reduced later to
100 or something else if we start hearing complains about the new timeout.
Hazem
As mentioned on the previous mail[1], either values are good to me :)
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Either way:
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Thank you!
Thanks,
SJ
--
Kees Cook
