harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm][smoke tests] Enabling smoke tests
Date Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:31:59 GMT


Elena Semukhina wrote:
> On 12/8/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nice work - I'm testing it now and will commit.  If someone can test
>> today on x86_64, that would be great, or I will do it tomorrow
> 
> 
> At last I managed to start the tests on x86_64 and they passed.
> They still print something like
> 
> test exception.FinalizeStackTest is skipped due to X_em64t

I thought I fixed those.  Oh!  I may not have committed.

> 
> I'll verify if this is still valid tomorrow.

I found a bunch of tests breaking on x86_64.  Let me double check to see 
if I have all checked in.

geir

> 
> 
> Elena
> 
> geir
>>
>>
>> Elena Semukhina wrote:
>> > After a few days of runs I can conclude that almost 40 tests are valid
>> and
>> > should be removed from the exclude lists. I've prepared a patch to 
>> smoke
>> > tests: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2543
>> >
>> > After it is applied we'll have 3 stable issues:
>> > 1) gc.Mark craches on Windows
>> > 2) - 3)  stress.Stack and io.Integers will pass only on linux/JIT and
>> fail
>> > on other configurations because of StackOverflowError. Is it a known
>> issue?
>> >
>> > We'll also have four tests failing intermittently. I plan to play with
>> them
>> > to get more details.
>> >
>> > All the above tests remain excluded.
>> >
>> > I prepared the update for ia32 platforms only because I don't have
>> > access to
>> > x86_64 machines for now. Hope to get it soon.
>> >
>> > I updated the http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTests with 
>> new
>> > details.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Elena
>> >
>> >
>> > On 12/7/06, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 12/7/06, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > 2006/12/6, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com>:
>> >> > > On 12/5/06, Rana Dasgupta <rdasgupt@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > How much total additional time would be needed to run the
tests
>> >> that
>> >> > are
>> >> > > > excluded for "slowness" only?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > There are 11 tests marked as slow. They run about 30 sec in JIT
>> mode.
>> >> > Only
>> >> > > one of them is rather slow: gc.Mark (~15 sec).
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I compared the whole run duration on linux (JIT + interpreter).
>> >> > Currently 26
>> >> > > tests run for about 3 min 30 sec. Adding 42 tests from exclude

>> list
>> >> > > increases duration up to 11 minutes (1 min 40 sec for JIT).
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Is this time acceptable?
>> >> >
>> >> > Probably yes.Exact timings depend on hardware used; I guess the
>> >> > figures above are on a laptop?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> No, 11 minutes are for multiprocessor machines (Windows/linux). On a
>> >> single processor desktop the tests run for 24 minutes :(  Most
>> >> annoying is
>> >> the interpreter mode. We can agree later that some slow tests 
>> should be
>> >> excluded for interpreter.
>> >>
>> >> Anyway I need a couple of days to run the tests intensively to reveal
>> all
>> >> unstable issues.
>> >>
>> >> Elena
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Anyway let's try them over! Later if someone analyzed coverage, we can
>> >> > re-balance pre-commit and CI tests.
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > Elena
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > > Rana
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On 12/5/06, Elena Semukhina <elena.semukhina@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > We currently have more than 40 smoke tests in the exclude

>> list.
>> >> > > > > I tried to run all of them on linux/Windows and found
out that
>> >> > most of
>> >> > > > > them
>> >> > > > > stably pass.
>> >> > > > > Those of them which have been marked with the "slow"
keyword
>> >> don't
>> >> > > > > actually
>> >> > > > > run slow. They are not slower than an average smoke
test. Only
>> >> few
>> >> > of
>> >> > > > them
>> >> > > > > work about 10 seconds (comparing to 1-4 seconds duration
of 
>> any
>> >> > other
>> >> > > > > test).
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Only 3 tests stably fail and about 5 tests fail 
>> intermittently.
>> >> > I've
>> >> > > > added
>> >> > > > > the details to the
>> >> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVMInternalTestspage.
>> >> > > > > I plan to file JIRA issues about failing tests and to
gather
>> more
>> >> > > > > statictics
>> >> > > > > on intermittent failures.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Does anybody object to removing most tests from exclude
lists
>> and
>> >> > bring
>> >> > > > > them
>> >> > > > > back to runs?
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > --
>> >> > > > > Thanks,
>> >> > > > > Elena
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > Elena
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Elena
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message