From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14824 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2010 12:36:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 14813 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Feb 2010 12:36:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:36:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACEF2BABB0; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 07:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id WTyWQyRSGO8g; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 07:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18B72BAB81; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 07:36:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 785CAF59A2; Tue, 9 Feb 2010 16:35:58 +0400 (RET) Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:36:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/testsuite] Reduce the default test timeout to 30 seconds for Unix. Message-ID: <20100209123558.GG16325@adacore.com> References: <1265631909-2821-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <201002081248.o18Cm6KS026601@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201002081248.o18Cm6KS026601@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg00252.txt.bz2 > > gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > * config/unix.exp (timeout): Change value to 30. > > > > Tested on x86_64-linux. No regression. > > I think that for this to be meaningful, you should really test this on > a slower platform though. Something like a native linux config on arm > should do the trick. I agree. The problem is that I had to test on at least one platform, and I don't have access to that many machines that are very noticeably slow, particularly the system that you suggest. I could tell you about one of our old x86-solaris machines, but I am under surveillance and will get killed if I even attempt the gdb-testsuite there. I think the slowest I have is ppc-aix, but even that I think is way too fast to trigger the timeout (I consider that, for the programs in our testsuite, anything other than an "immediate" response is a bug). All in all, I think the fairest test would be to try with a configuration where communication with the target is really slow, something over the serial line. But we don't have any such configuration at AdaCore. That being said, it's a shame to potentially penalize almost everyone just because some systems might be too slow for the default 10 seconds timeout. I thought that 30 secs was a good compromise for today's equipment (meaning today's outdated equipment). If there are still some such systems out there where 30secs is not enough, they can very easily change the timeout duration back. It's fine if we decide to be conservative and not apply this patch without more testing. But I think we should just give it a try, and see what happens. We have very little to lose. It's really easy to further adjust the timeout if some of the developers notice that 30 secs is too small, or even revert. But I suspect/hope that this will only ever happen with specific non-unix configuration, where they already use a board file that they'll instantly update to get a longer timeout. -- Joel