Received: by 2002:a25:d7c1:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o184csp882723ybg; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:45:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxKYIDT1Um1wpp5Heu0HmpVsUynyCBj7xOjPtIZoLAd+525mWxxkRY9pI9fHe8XpooEb+wO X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d358:: with SMTP id m24mr10366628edr.204.1571413515330; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:45:15 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1571413515; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=fZtsXRVwratJf/yjIH9iU+V0DfKdKeQaitNRl946cKbZ14ZmFAsI0ACXjoz5NWXQQA UMvlCC+MZi7psPENcg0lWq3gDwwGv7jjViqweh+UthofbJbDh4grN+xJDUNcik1QZGSG S6ukVm8jNbgkmBT4jFgOKUVk1Zh60OZIesxeDVb4eDFcMK6PeFY8zwx8ZPm0yY1hCc8R /tKHSkDucH9OpPWGeCr4BVcM5GyI8kO/FwOeq3M/HDBHRAbhDmrkhaRhFuYoOw7NfySs AagLFEvlvtdgC5Y20tF2JVTBEsnLdPIjor5PvfJGdi9Jn5pFgIEzqim71G3ZL4kVdBBM xLSw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=BOid4KVqpxPepuhozvGkGOueLSKPY36M7QC1uac11JU=; b=jSoRmOsKh4zy///OXhhi3Tb7A1JUwnYwXonH0tqjY0pm6d4h4Vb4tHqJ9eX8GeXVNB wp0+ZIqSoOTgyKgub7dWcsq81F5CUsHxMrdPWYN3hTzL8tjtOfA6IaGFKPCGu1iJ/3zB Z410YJndLgFQyr5kJCzptBAZbRFw0D3vFC2gdXjtxqZAzz+mR2SFfElMeL/fK8dh1b+A DG1AcKZcr3PpTnI3KBLOyIcAmNJUK9kKGGzbOQtete/VlvXQOrn3DHHd5dbD4GY1LvzB GSGEVd/xPQeR7Hwl+a0vjmNFIoovrEVZegpNr+GQgFcUhlNYxhMkc3XOPn/IC9xy76yM q+3Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p14si3910030edc.227.2019.10.18.08.44.44; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391988AbfJQMIm (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:08:42 -0400 Received: from outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu ([18.9.28.11]:54683 "EHLO outgoing.mit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731634AbfJQMIm (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:08:42 -0400 Received: from callcc.thunk.org (guestnat-104-133-0-98.corp.google.com [104.133.0.98] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id x9HC8Yro023150 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:08:34 -0400 Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id B7A5E420458; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:08:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:08:33 -0400 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" To: Shuah Khan Cc: Brendan Higgins , Iurii Zaikin , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, KUnit Development Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v2] ext4: add kunit test for decoding extended timestamps Message-ID: <20191017120833.GA25548@mit.edu> References: <20191010023931.230475-1-yzaikin@google.com> <2f2ea7b0-f683-1cdd-f3f2-ecdf44cb4a97@linuxfoundation.org> <20191011131902.GC16225@mit.edu> <1e6611e6-2fa6-6f7d-bc7f-0bc2243d9342@linuxfoundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1e6611e6-2fa6-6f7d-bc7f-0bc2243d9342@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 05:26:29PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > > I don't really buy the argument that unit tests should be deterministic > Possibly, but I would opt for having the ability to feed test data. I strongly believe that unit tests should be deterministic. Non-deterministic tests are essentially fuzz tests. And fuzz tests should be different from unit tests. We want unit tests to run quickly. Fuzz tests need to be run for a large number of passes (perhaps hours) in order to be sure that we've hit any possible bad cases. We want to be able to easily bisect fuzz tests --- preferably, automatically. And any kind of flakey test is hell to bisect. It's bad enough when a test is flakey because of the underlying code. But when a test is flakey because the test inputs are non-deterministic, it's even worse. - Ted