[LTP] [PATCH] memcg_stress_test.sh: Respect LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL set by user

[Clemens Famulla-Conrad]

On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 17:34 +0800, Li Wang wrote:
> > > > > I also wonder if it is worth somehow put this minimum-enforce
> > > > > mechanism inside the framework itself
> > > > > instead that hardcoding it in this specific test (unless you
> > > > > already mean to do it this way...
> > > > > and I misunderstood)
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I was thinking about it as well.
> > > > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL should be reserved for users, tests should use
> > > > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN,
> > > > check for LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL being higher than LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN
> > > > would be in
> > > > _tst_setup_timer(). Similar mechanism I introduced in 9d6a960d9
> > > > (VIRT_PERF_THRESHOLD_MIN).
> > > 
> > > +1 agree.
> > 
> > I have a general question. What do we try to get with
> > LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN? From my perspective, we try to set a minimum
> > timeout value. Isn't it the value (struct tst_test*)->timeout ?
> > 
> 
> Well, the (struct tst_test*)->timeout is the default minimum value to
> set a
> timeout, but for some test case(e.g memcg_stress_test.sh), they
> required
> time should be higher than the default. So as we discussed in the
> above
> mails, we're planning to introduce a new variable LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN
> to
> set as a new minimum value for test timeout. The operation will be
> encapsulate in function  _tst_setup_timer().
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > I'm missing such configuration value for shell. Is there one?
> > 
> 
> No, we don't have it so far.
> 
> 
> > 
> > Or do we need to increase timeout in smaller steps and that is why
> > we
> > need this LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN?
> > 
> 
> Hmm, what we want to do is:
> 
> If a testcase needs timeout value is larger than the default (300
> sec), we
> could only define a variable LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN in the test, then
> the
> _tst_setup_timer() will detect if LTP_TIMEOUT_MUL_MIN is valid and
> reset
> the minimum time for the test.
> 
> @Petr and @Cristian, If I misunderstand anything, please correct me.

So from what I understood now, we need to specify a minimum timeout and
not a minimum timeout multiplier.
And we already have it for c, but only miss it in shell, or?