From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: msantana@redhat.com, David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, ci@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/14] Unit tests fixes for CI
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2019 08:17:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f7tsgrq0x06.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2134880.WhL1dmy7PZ@xps> (Thomas Monjalon's message of "Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:34:18 +0200")
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> writes:
> 04/06/2019 17:49, Michael Santana Francisco:
>> On 6/4/19 4:59 AM, David Marchand wrote:
>> > - the "perf" tests are taking way too long for my taste,
+1 here.
>>
>> We should still fix them. However I don't know if we should be running
>> the perf test for every job and every patch on travis. It takes too
>> long. The travis queue will be delayed too far behind for it to be of
>> any use.
>>
>> OTOH we could have one job as part of the travis build dedicated to
>> running tests (or just perf test). It's still time consuming but better
>> than running the test on every travis job. For this to work we would
>> need to decreased the timeout for the perf tests as the timeout for it
>> and the travis are both 10 minutes
>
> +Cc ci@dpdk.org
>
> I don't think we should run the perf tests in basic CI like Travis.
> We can run perf tests if the purpose is to compare the performance
> with previous releases, as some other tests in the community lab.
+1 - some of the perf tests aren't going to complete in any sort of
reasonable time. While we could claim it's a separate problem, we
should also not enable something that will make the travis runs so much
longer.
I do like the idea of running tests in the travis build, and I think it
would make sense to have just a single job for it (or maybe one for
clang and one for gcc? maybe even that is overkill).
I would rather not do performance tests during the travis run, though.
It doesn't really make sense. Travis isn't any kind of an 'optimized'
environment, so I don't know what 'performance' should mean.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-01 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1559638792-8608-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <81c5f665-97ac-c4d0-8281-8f195c63195e@redhat.com>
2019-06-27 16:34 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-01 12:17 ` Aaron Conole [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=f7tsgrq0x06.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com \
--to=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=ci@dpdk.org \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=msantana@redhat.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).