From patchwork Mon Jun 1 12:45:38 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo X-Patchwork-Id: 1301729 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=lists.ubuntu.com (client-ip=91.189.94.19; helo=huckleberry.canonical.com; envelope-from=kernel-team-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=canonical.com Received: from huckleberry.canonical.com (huckleberry.canonical.com [91.189.94.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49bFK30chqz9sSc; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 22:45:58 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=huckleberry.canonical.com) by huckleberry.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfjpD-0008M2-Pc; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 12:45:55 +0000 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]) by huckleberry.canonical.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfjpB-0008Lq-TG for kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 12:45:53 +0000 Received: from 201-95-154-249.dsl.telesp.net.br ([201.95.154.249] helo=localhost.localdomain) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jfjpA-0004Is-FW for kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 12:45:53 +0000 From: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo To: kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Subject: [SRU Eoan 1/1] UBUNTU: SAUCE: selftests/seccomp: use 90s as timeout Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 09:45:38 -0300 Message-Id: <20200601124539.1185145-2-cascardo@canonical.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20200601124539.1185145-1-cascardo@canonical.com> References: <20200601124539.1185145-1-cascardo@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Kernel team discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kernel-team-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com Sender: "kernel-team" BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1881576 As seccomp_benchmark tries to calibrate how many samples will take more than 5 seconds to execute, it may end up picking up a number of samples that take 10 (but up to 12) seconds. As the calibration will take double that time, it takes around 20 seconds. Then, it executes the whole thing again, and then once more, with some added overhead. So, the thing might take more than 40 seconds, which is too close to the 45s timeout. That is very dependent on the system where it's executed, so may not be observed always, but it has been observed on x86 VMs. Using a 90s timeout seems safe enough. Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo --- tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/settings | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/settings diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/settings b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/settings new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..ba4d85f74cd6 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/settings @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +timeout=90