From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11D6A0546; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:05:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793E640150; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:05:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE634003F for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:05:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5BD41286; Tue, 25 May 2021 04:05:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 May 2021 04:05:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= 9r0tsaIyxgpuyJdhlxvx01yM5nLYxRtkDhu0de7iujw=; b=ThztQbd9WdjLtK4H qs3VbeSifFOZhgLh57iHl1+FjVzhBHqYenvmmdkxRH8ZMQaV0df3/Hym7moLW0e5 MAC3KW9+2PWcPJFE7ROWXznLvj82BIAgJ1uCCHE0JTGQbk1YtYK1yMMomRnZSYBs syvmJjM96VVoTBUvxfRHij0+0C6NuGZvmMyoGcJn9SWY8nlTGNS3aQP5olrKwU6r WHL8Kx5ePhL8KTTvPaQq9J/hi2ajo0u9rIiVPU10HiJvIWBQR93QH7FGFHuyh92C UO18J1w/M2xaOZgpoCqA2xwcDgJl8T6WscwnIa2zArwqnH+WwQfH/2JUhuHDNClx Ffi7fg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9r0tsaIyxgpuyJdhlxvx01yM5nLYxRtkDhu0de7iu jw=; b=rbuZCzRS/71B2/6BM6jKuNSaUCggiEqQAzYXLq2e0xkblj2d2dUfRMYZ4 BHd9LqKI65qM2Rl9yibjPKoKM3fugmxJpL+gwV4/NIrszajraEqBjgyTkEPasDw5 Akz2MnCPubdBrEUlJ486g3nxJGx5IqiBDI0DBbvdZA/e2iRxa7FCffZktJ3hXJr7 RD0YL8fwIhiKGR/TtBemLWJ6a0FvwEzvmlYqwyVgBFlZXh4eAjR65w/oALGNWkAp pn5AZcDIKuSvjmK3kahSzFmE46OsVHov1RRvJUL+HghIp4u4JsiFyGFxDB5hj5do uYEfF1V+nCLU2BpoSKZNM1prHQgng== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdekudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurf hrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfo ohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpedugefgvdefudfftdefgeelgffhueekgfffhfeujedtteeutdejueeiiedv ffegheenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdr nhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 25 May 2021 04:05:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Aaron Conole Cc: dev@dpdk.org, David Marchand , Michael Santana , Ilya Maximets , Erik Gabriel Carrillo , bruce.richardson@intel.com Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 10:05:40 +0200 Message-ID: <23172713.yfyB1BgmTZ@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-ci] [PATCH] test: drop 'alarm_autotest' and 'cycles_autotest' from test suite X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 25/05/2021 02:16, Aaron Conole: > The tests 'alarm_autotest' and 'cycles_autotest' rely on the underlying > system having very accurate and precise timing. On systems where the timing > isn't as rigid, or the load is particularly high, these tests are unreliable > since the wake latency from the scheduler can be high enough to miss the > timing window. > > Remove these tests from the test suites. Maybe it's useful for these > tests to be present as a diagnostics tool, but for normal unit testing, > they don't provide much value. They have falsely flagged patches as > FAIL on various infrastructures. Are sure of the value keeping the source code?