From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 103008 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2019 13:58:49 -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 102993 invoked by uid 89); 5 Aug 2019 13:58:49 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-13.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=mental, HX-Languages-Length:1212, H*M:49d8 X-HELO: mx1.suse.de Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx1.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 13:58:48 +0000 Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5F3AC1C; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 13:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Increase timeout in gdb.mi/list-thread-groups-available.exp To: Simon Marchi , Tom Tromey Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20190801143855.1640-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <87ftmkagwi.fsf@tromey.com> <9cc09b45-ba14-3299-6f99-b738c349ed94@efficios.com> <87tvazisy8.fsf@tromey.com> From: Tom de Vries Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: <77355b99-49d8-e3c2-f2c1-001e5b1ff595@suse.de> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 13:58:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-08/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 On 02-08-19 16:46, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2019-08-02 9:43 a.m., Tom Tromey wrote: >> I'm reluctant to make the test suite more sensitive to the environment >> it's running it. Is the reason to do this that the test can time out >> normally, and so we'd like to avoid lengthy timeouts? If that's the >> case, can the test be fixed somehow instead? >> >> I guess my mental model here is that a timeout should not matter unless >> a test is flaky. But maybe that's naive? I don't know :-) > > No, the test is not expected to time out under normal circumstances. The advantage > of having with_read1_timeout_factor is just that if we happen to break this test > and make it time out, we'll have to wait 10 seconds instead of 100 when running without > read1. > > Given that the probability of breaking this test is very small, I don't have > a strong opinion on the matter, it doesn't affect the correctness of the testsuite. I went ahead and committed a patch introducing with_read1_timeout_factor ( https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-08/msg00107.html ). Simon, can you commit your patch, fixing both mi_gdb_tests? Thanks, - Tom