Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 18 May 2023 09:52:11 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To:     Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>
Cc:     "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro@fastmail.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v4 05/11] nvme{032,040}: Use runtime fio
 background jobs
Message-ID: <eykbvi7lzhnbd6ft6cva6qu4lp5ryn3ha2fgigmao2553qm4bu@227ey5mv5ls5>
References: <20230511140953.17609-1-dwagner@suse.de>
 <20230511140953.17609-6-dwagner@suse.de>
 <50c50cda-23f5-b55d-a902-ce34de8498e1@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50c50cda-23f5-b55d-a902-ce34de8498e1@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 04:40:52AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 5/11/23 07:09, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> > The fio jobs are supposed to run long in background during the test.
> > Instead relying on a job size use explicit runtime for this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
> 
> Is there any issue with the exiting approach for this change ?

The expectation of the test here is that there is a background job running.
Depending on the job size is an indirect way to express run at least for x
seconds. This gives a variable runtime as it depends the how fast fio jobs gets
executed. Explicitly telling the runtime is my opinion more robust and documents
the indention better.