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 36B04439C5; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25BE2402AB; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from inbox.dpdk.org (inbox.dpdk.org [95.142.172.178]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4783F4029B for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:56 +0100 (CET) Received: by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 3A8FB439C7; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:56 +0100 (CET) From: bugzilla@dpdk.org To: dev@dpdk.org Subject: [DPDK Bug 1375] Make limited use of "per testsuite" conf files. Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 20:00:56 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: DPDK X-Bugzilla-Component: dts X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: probb@iol.unh.edu X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: dev@dpdk.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version rep_platform op_sys bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter cc target_milestone Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=17062128561.aDCDEd.1518397 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All MIME-Version: 1.0 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 --17062128561.aDCDEd.1518397 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1375 Bug ID: 1375 Summary: Make limited use of "per testsuite" conf files. Product: DPDK Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: Normal Component: dts Assignee: dev@dpdk.org Reporter: probb@iol.unh.edu CC: juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, probb@iol.unh.edu Target Milestone: --- There will be examples of testsuite which require some divserse input on a = per testsuite or environment basis (setting expected baselines for a testsuite = in perf testing is one example). So, we are going to be doing this at some poi= nt anyways, and I think it is okay to do so now with functional tests too if it can help make testsuites more concise. I don't want this suggestion to be conflated with our previous discussion a= bout building a YAML schema and intepreter for taking testsuite parameters and a= lso python functions and mapping that to a python testsuite. I think it's clear based on our 1/24 meeting that we are not going in that direction. However,= we probably do need per-testsuite conf files for some (but not all) suites. I think how we best leverage this can be a discussion point for next week's D= TS meeting. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= --17062128561.aDCDEd.1518397 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:00:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.dpdk.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Bug ID 1375
Summary Make limited use of "per testsuite" conf files.
Product DPDK
Version unspecified
Hardware All
OS All
Status UNCONFIRMED
Severity normal
Priority Normal
Component dts
Assignee dev@dpdk.org
Reporter probb@iol.unh.edu
CC juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, probb@iol.unh.edu
Target Milestone --- 

There will be examples of testsuit=
e which require some divserse input on a per
testsuite or environment basis (setting expected baselines for a testsuite =
in
perf testing is one example). So, we are going to be doing this at some poi=
nt
anyways, and I think it is okay to do so now with functional tests too if it
can help make testsuites more concise.

I don't want this suggestion to be conflated with our previous discussion a=
bout
building a YAML schema and intepreter for taking testsuite parameters and a=
lso
python functions and mapping that to a python testsuite. I think it's clear
based on our 1/24 meeting that we are not going in that direction. However,=
 we
probably do need per-testsuite conf files for some (but not all) suites. I
think how we best leverage this can be a discussion point for next week's D=
TS
meeting.

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20
= --17062128561.aDCDEd.1518397--