From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9864FC4338F for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 06:40:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 335676103B for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 06:40:47 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 335676103B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:41504 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9ifu-00010E-6u for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:40:46 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50640) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9ieo-0008El-8r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:39:38 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:36772) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9iek-0002Qq-UY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:39:36 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1627713572; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=P8SKtKnbejM2m6RyRiT+nyi6RiWKs260tt/gK9jIXoU=; b=GsROCfyiaYKzBMbcdg8HKgVkyq3882f9l/jlltJmxxQhcxrV+BquNmyWjb+jXXar8fVdWs ZT/oRQvVfeg1D5XLChg8UxDy9lvLZbJ0ctQBAy/jHQ5eRE5SQedQx0RCtqDjj3ouXtDygC G/WvVCgPxegBsoxmQym9Z6Njr5bGn0U= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-345-SAcvx3J6NhuiCtisieVJrA-1; Sat, 31 Jul 2021 02:39:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: SAcvx3J6NhuiCtisieVJrA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id u14-20020a7bcb0e0000b0290248831d46e4so3905097wmj.6 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 23:39:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=P8SKtKnbejM2m6RyRiT+nyi6RiWKs260tt/gK9jIXoU=; b=pqAOq8qo41NkA2PZhST685bFifAtOy/aM5PQliiT+MI0ohxKaUn2iEfCLEypdrmMJD 14PtLe8Osnc0hSagzspCMI39alKIGLNwbuJ3yVN6v7M51P6xpTDOhO1xxlV28iyR3cMd P5AVU5d1rSzS6SDE5PCVYNAxWG2SJRVrQ4LENSMl4s1g+nIwnKCXQxMfur+OjTj2NcEx id7537ewExHK6RnvO0Sa67gZeZTGI4yZlbVQmtRe4MEGm0IPKga0xMY/ZrB2uSLh4pG8 szHmgftdAD1WzeW3oaqIfl9WrtA/MvLJdNpb3wuApFXiI6VXWPuUkYUfJQw8f14KQaiN 9vxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530LzG+9EOaPZfTR4kvBOMJzg1UmZtTCbsnVZdFfReX7ecQITrtH rGo24flhCyHKUATIX0zqTfW5ejoTdi91TFsMHfjncfsO/m5DOt0Ojgx41pjDGm3LJSD+A/+/sGP WGmwnSm8wAAeDZE62kNXoHpkWBr0Caoigd0LURizBFUTcAsPl/LL2S2D8kkoBF9k= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4cc6:: with SMTP id c6mr6659902wrt.383.1627713570027; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 23:39:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxJyzCIXGEkplZu8rq5Z0PQPjqGC+lsOPlEvRtSPmpi3lA0DRYTJMLoKkmIBEWnU7b1LasnHg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4cc6:: with SMTP id c6mr6659611wrt.383.1627713564767; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 23:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thuth.remote.csb (p5791d280.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [87.145.210.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k17sm399665wmj.0.2021.07.30.23.39.23 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 30 Jul 2021 23:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: "make check-acceptance" takes way too long To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org References: From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <20afa6d3-2ecb-c4f4-398b-08f298ae82d7@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2021 08:39:22 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=thuth@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=thuth@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -35 X-Spam_score: -3.6 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.717, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.125, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 31/07/2021 00.04, Cleber Rosa wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 11:43 AM Peter Maydell wrote: >> >> On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 at 16:12, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> >>> "make check-acceptance" takes way way too long. I just did a run >>> on an arm-and-aarch64-targets-only debug build and it took over >>> half an hour, and this despite it skipping or cancelling 26 out >>> of 58 tests! >>> >>> I think that ~10 minutes runtime is reasonable. 30 is not; >>> ideally no individual test would take more than a minute or so. >> >> Side note, can check-acceptance run multiple tests in parallel? > > Yes, it can, but it's not currently enabled to do so, but I'm planning > to. As a matter of fact, Yesterday I was trying out Avocado's > parallel capable runner on a GitLab CI pipeline[1] and it went well. Was this one of the shared gitlab CI runners? ... well, those feature only a single CPU, so the run was likely not very different compared to a single run. > But the environment on GitLab CI is fluid, and I bet there's already > some level of overcommit of (at least) CPUs there. The only pipeline > I ran there with tests running in parallel, resulted in some jobs with > improvements, and others with regressions in runtime. Additionally, > lack of adequate resources can make more tests time out, and thus give > out false negatives. It certainly does not make sense to enable parallel tests for the shared runners there. Thomas