From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10341 invoked by alias); 19 May 2015 18:08:01 -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 10319 invoked by uid 89); 19 May 2015 18:08:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no 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, 19 May 2015 18:07:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 683F8B595D; Tue, 19 May 2015 18:07:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4JI7u6H018224; Tue, 19 May 2015 14:07:57 -0400 Message-ID: <555B7BFC.6050801@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 18:08:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/17] Fix and test "checkpoint" in non-stop mode References: <1429267521-21047-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1429267521-21047-2-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <5537DEDD.5000103@redhat.com> <21823.45051.20019.326313@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00491.txt.bz2 On 04/28/2015 10:50 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > Another thought was that if this is just a one-off and you're manually > splitting up non-stop from all-stop to maintain parallelizability of the tests > then I might not mind the new file. I don't have plans to do this in any other test, so for now at least, this is really just a one-off. It's special because "checkpoint" only really works with single-threaded programs (because it uses fork), while non-stop/all-stop mostly matters about threaded programs. > > IOW, tests that want to handle both all-stop and non-stop in one > "make check" can do so in one file. Any loss in parallelization > is probably minimal (modulo really big tests). Yes, and we already do that in some tests. > > Btw, checkpoint.exp completes in 9 seconds on my system. > I suspect doubling that and doing both all-stop and non-stop in > the one file won't increase "make check-parallel" noticeably. It makes a larger difference for me: $ time make check RUNTESTFLAGS="checkpoint.exp" real 0m24.716s user 0m22.676s sys 0m2.168s $ time make check RUNTESTFLAGS="checkpoint.exp checkpoint-ns.exp" real 0m49.241s user 0m45.183s sys 0m4.306s $ time make check TESTS="gdb.base/checkpoint.exp gdb.base/checkpoint-ns.exp" -j real 0m28.606s user 0m49.684s sys 0m5.590s Thanks, Pedro Alves