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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 0D693C433ED for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 06:58:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB72613F6 for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 06:58:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231789AbhENHAB (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 03:00:01 -0400 Received: from mail.monom.org ([188.138.9.77]:49560 "EHLO mail.monom.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231424AbhENHAB (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 03:00:01 -0400 Received: from mail.monom.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filter.mynetwork.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id E30F05005DA; Fri, 14 May 2021 08:58:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (unknown [94.31.99.148]) by mail.monom.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A48FA500322; Fri, 14 May 2021 08:58:48 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 08:58:48 +0200 From: Daniel Wagner To: John Kacur Cc: Daniel Wagner , Clark Williams , linux-rt-users Subject: Re: [PATCH rt-tests v3 27/33] pip_stress: Return failure code if test fails Message-ID: <20210514065848.5rexjzwnxpdiqrru@beryllium.lan> References: <20210320183829.1318-1-dwagner@suse.de> <20210320183829.1318-28-dwagner@suse.de> <20210512073554.ocoaqweoibkeyxgx@beryllium.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 03:27:31PM -0400, John Kacur wrote: > I suppose this is a fair question, although another question would be > is it useful in the rt-tests suites for other reasons? > It could be used as the "engine" of a test that would be similar to > pi_stress, with a different kind of mechanism. If there is clear indication which code is provided as coding example and which is a RT test it would already help. I was under the impression pi_stress tries to test RT behavior. Maybe moving pi_stress to 'examples' would already be enough. > So then the question would be, is there a value in another pi_stress > like test that avoids pthreads? > > If so, I could work it up into a test. I suppose having more RT tests is good thing. IIRC there are more RT tests available, e.g. in LTP. So not sure if this is not already covered somewhere else.