From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4571 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2014 12:30:03 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 4545 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jul 2014 12:30:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:30:01 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s6TCTwbv016271 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 29 Jul 2014 08:29:58 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s6TCTu3a006216; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 08:29:57 -0400 Message-ID: <53D793C4.30200@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:35:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] GDB/testsuite: Avoid timeout lowering References: <53D1B4CC.4010004@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <53D1B4CC.4010004@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg00720.txt.bz2 On 07/25/2014 02:37 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 07/25/2014 06:38 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: >> With the timeout selection code from gdb_test_multiple gone, gone is also >> the most prominent use of this timeout argument, it's now used in a couple >> of places only, mostly within this test framework library code itself for >> preparatory commands or suchlike. With this being the case this timeout >> selection code can be simplified as follows: >> >> 1. Among the three timeout variables, the highest is always chosen. This >> is so that a test case doesn't inadvertently lower a high value timeout >> needed by slow target boards. This is what all test cases use. >> >> 2. Any timeout argument takes precedence. This is for special cases such >> as within the framework library code, e.g. it doesn't make sense to >> send `set height 0' with a timeout of 7200 seconds. This is a local >> command that does not interact with the target and setting a high >> timeout here only risks a test suite run taking ages if it goes astray >> for some reason. Indeed. It feels like a host vs target timeout concept. That is, we can still have a slow remote host, but that's a different vector of slow vs a slow target. >> >> 3. The fallback timeout of 60s remains. > > Maciej, > IWBN to put the descriptions about timeout selection into the comments > of proc gdb_expect. Agreed. Or even somewhere more central, and have gdb_expect gdb_test_multiple, etc. refer to that. > I don't see anything wrong in this patch. Me neither. Thanks, Pedro Alves