All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 4/4] tests: torture release-ram in postcopy test
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 12:42:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180724114205.GB2374@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180724113654.GB2479@xz-mi>

* Peter Xu (peterx@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:25:24AM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> > Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > The release-ram capability will run some extra code for postcopy to
> > > release used ram right away, let's just turn that on for the postcopy
> > > unix test always to torture that code path too to make sure release-ram
> > > feature won't break again.  The recovery test needs to turn that off
> > > since release-ram cannot coop with that.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > 
> > But I think that the proper thing to do here is to have two tests.  One
> > for postcopy and another for postcopy + release-ram.
> 
> Yeah I thought about it too, but I am not sure whether it'll worth it
> to have a separate test for the release-ram feature (basically that's
> some extra seconds for every unit test, even on relatively fast CPUs).
> I did it this way since IMHO release-ram is mostly adding extra code
> path to the postcopy logic, hence we should not miss much (or any) of
> the old test path.  Ideally we should still cover all the postcopy
> code path that we want to test.

It's worth being a bit careful, since I'm not sure if release-ram has
ever been tested on hosts with larger page size; my suspicion is you
might get a spew of errors on Power.

Dave

> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Peter Xu
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-24 11:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-23 12:33 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 0/4] migration: some fixes for release-ram Peter Xu
2018-07-23 12:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 1/4] migration: update recv bitmap only on dest vm Peter Xu
2018-07-24  9:20   ` Juan Quintela
2018-07-23 12:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 2/4] migration: disallow recovery for release-ram Peter Xu
2018-07-24  9:21   ` Juan Quintela
2018-07-24 11:39     ` Peter Xu
2018-07-23 12:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 3/4] tests: only update last_byte when at the edge Peter Xu
2018-07-24  9:23   ` Juan Quintela
2018-07-23 12:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 4/4] tests: torture release-ram in postcopy test Peter Xu
2018-07-24  9:25   ` Juan Quintela
2018-07-24 11:36     ` Peter Xu
2018-07-24 11:42       ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert [this message]
2018-07-24 11:52         ` Peter Xu
2018-07-24 16:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.0 0/4] migration: some fixes for release-ram Dr. David Alan Gilbert

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=20180724114205.GB2374@work-vm \
    --to=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=quintela@redhat.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.