Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:46:05 -0700
From:      Matt Olander <matt@ixsystems.com>
To:        "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "freebsd-testing@freebsd.org" <freebsd-testing@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org" <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org>, Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>
Subject:   Re: Automatically running /usr/tests on stable/10 branch under Jenkins
Message-ID:  <CAK6u07Xovg_RqsFB%2B-3OsFDjcLQU=pD-bvv%2BokLOd_z=Q83zjg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHM0Q_O_mr3X7bAZLEDJ78VgBv5yb8Gh2OwiXbiM3-00wYX46g@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAG=rPVe-hCYiH5YuC%2BrzrucJbHJvEFmik0RAA%2Brq%2BXQ5K_A0Ww@mail.gmail.com> <20141024053636.GH11222@dft-labs.eu> <CAHM0Q_MOLoYGVhVOwAHfxKmMdX8bBK0Y=OoiR0TR=t3kQyYtVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAG=rPVcRkCtwjNdzO2p6PuMVTLTFh7qKN=pxPVDrE0DM=R_a9w@mail.gmail.com> <81030948-E60F-4AAD-AAF1-16349607917D@gmail.com> <544B46BA.4000008@freebsd.org> <FBD107B5-519F-4BB5-80DD-050E9FE22ABC@gmail.com> <CAHM0Q_O_mr3X7bAZLEDJ78VgBv5yb8Gh2OwiXbiM3-00wYX46g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:20 PM, K. Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> Alan also suggested against integrating the test suite as-is, because =
as he said, "Remember, don't run these tests on a production system.  They =
WILL cause panics and deadlocks, and they may cause data loss too.=E2=80=9D
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Garrett
>>>
>>> Wait, we want to sweep those bugs under the rug?  What exactly is wrong=
 with making a test harness that can very easily reproduce a known problem?=
  The chances are that anyone will dive into it once the bug is easily repr=
oducible.
>>
>>         Sweeping bugs under the rug is not what I plan on doing; I=E2=80=
=99m marking these as expected failures, as opposed to having them continua=
lly panic a machine. Once a ZFS dev takes a look at the issue and resolves =
them, then the ZFS dev can remove the =E2=80=9Cbail=E2=80=9D calls I=E2=80=
=99m adding to the testcases.
>> Cheers,
>> -Garrett
>
> Yes, disabling tests that fail leads to an ineffectual test suite. A
> test suite that never has any failures is not very useful. However,
> there are two factors to take in to account in this context:
> a) frequent failures can lead users to stop running a test suite
> leading to further regressions
> b) long-term repeated failures can desensitize users leading them to
> ignore *new* failures facilitating further regressions
>
> Thus it's really a question of what context you're talking about
> running the test suite in. For purposes of Jenkins we want full
> visibility in to what is passing and what is failing and how long this
> has been going on for.

Agreed. We're talking about doing an OpenZFS bug-tracker and maybe we
could have tests post there automatically, once the bug is opened. I
am going to put this on the board at MeetBSD Ca. next week, so we can
have a discussion about it in real-time with some of the people
present.

Cheers,
-matt



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAK6u07Xovg_RqsFB%2B-3OsFDjcLQU=pD-bvv%2BokLOd_z=Q83zjg>