Re: [lustre-devel] [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] [DRAFT] Lustre client upstreaming

On Thu, 2025-02-06 at 18:36 +0000, Day, Timothy wrote:
> > To better cover the skew between different VMs running different
> > subtests, we could change the test-framework code to run the
> > subtests in different order (either starting at a random offset, or
> > in random order).
> > 
> > This would also expose some hidden assumptions and dependencies in
> > the subtests themselves, so that would need to be fixed to avoid
> > false test failures, but the main goal of the boilpot testing is
> > finding crashes/deadlocks, so if a few tests fail because of minor
> > test issues I don't think that is a blocker.
> > 
> > 
> > Cheers, Andreas
> 
> We could also limit each VM to run a subset of the sanity tests. Then
> we could cap the length of the longest run test. I have some
> scripting
> magic already to divide up the subtests between VMs.

That probably means you need more VMs to cover everything good enough
(the process is probabilistic as it is)
_______________________________________________
lustre-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-devel-lustre.org