[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200314024855.ugbvrmqkfq7kao75@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 19:48:55 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-team@...udflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix spurious failures in accept
due to EAGAIN
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 05:42:36PM +0100, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
>
> What if we extended test_progs runner to support process-per-test
> execution model? Perhaps as an opt-in for selected tests.
I would love that.
Especially if fork-per-test can make majority of the tests to execute in
parallel. Running test_progs is the biggest time sync for me when I apply
patches. Running them in parallel will help me apply patches faster, so I can
dedicate more time to reviews :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists