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 26CAC46F2F; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:28:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD7A640288; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:28:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fout-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.145]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 889B84027A for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:28:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A384B1D003CF; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 08:28:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Sep 2025 08:28:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1758198489; x=1758284889; bh=CP9EqMT05t4EtJKzta6pBKGZbVtv+9mUwt6VuHgcPEY=; b= GIDmaJooiF4OBm+zeM2aqi6CV7RT05yi8xqQWbhxy9Cro53xb9sWLZ+rSD9RbZL/ QzaBaDmVWCZrF2C//BdCsSyEkClOtmlirqN39dsMJWRYRib2efuSoECFVYJnfcG9 W4PA3NQvaZXt6Z3MLJCCmf/nMs3IZpFzG5l+VL6NcyOhvY0znuzIACKvrnXGcjDp FxNL1X0xj7l5i9TZpiI7blFMoWqo5/JbL94l/yFzthzquR5l/hmGZ+f9RTtkFvmG jTwhGJiD75OXCHXsC/p9g1N3es9FCP90/QgS5V1RjTdRMF5PlO4+Dkx/1Evzkvm4 uGqGgWI2j/MkctYH/CFfbA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1758198489; x= 1758284889; bh=CP9EqMT05t4EtJKzta6pBKGZbVtv+9mUwt6VuHgcPEY=; b=o F9bFlw0RwOjFn3jv76N36U90GJWQ5xkDMlLwSELm+p7QfZ1ft4OVmPWr1dKBrqdt 8vUVzxDR3Q7svIdd2DWdw6F14r4oriHs8g84Ts7XZbtT2GTTfHZKrUN5GGlqzeUL gQ6Epx24u1gjBRngiWGbpsWPQ+axHdQA948/UAnWbdtNyEe+F3mVcALmf5kGLL+b WIZHiUFABgOdYENZ6nA+coqAKdjbhIIvg/aCDS8zdplFXcByqYT2G69lcI6Prjwi FKb8TdDL+ZPjDbiGsXGDFO7+R02vcT0jjQF8TCV6ePHQ9rric5k5S856MZFy/B8I Nv08YynkBVKT0YQfZ+uEQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdegieeffecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcu ofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhepjeduveehieevuddutdevfffgtdegkeeuveejffejgedtgeegkefgvdeu gfefkeejnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepfedpmhho uggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepuggrvhhiugdrmhgrrhgthhgrnhgusehrvg guhhgrthdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopeguvghvseguphgukhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthho pehisehhrggtkhefrhdrmhhovg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 08:28:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: David Marchand , dev@dpdk.org Cc: Eric Long Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: raise fast test timeout to 60s on RISC-V Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:28:07 +0200 Message-ID: <3616255.BddDVKsqQX@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 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 27/11/2024 04:26, Eric Long: > On 27/11/2024 04:29, David Marchand wrote: > > You can extend the timeout via the multiplier option (default timeout > > of 10s * multiplier). > > So in your case: > > $ meson test -C --suite fast-tests -t 6 > > I hope the RISC-V specific extended timeout could be upstreamed though, > in this way we won't need to bump timeout in every distro supporting the > architecture (like Debian [1]) or even not running the tests altogether > (like OpenSUSE [2] and Fedora [3]), just because tests are failing due > to timeout. What do we decide? A specific timeout doesn't harm I guess?