Re: increasing default timeout significantly

[Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>]

* Mike Frysinger:

> On 22 Jan 2016 18:10, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 01/19/2016 10:18 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > is there a compelling reason to keep the default timeout so low ?
>> 
>> Some tests use TIMEOUT not just as a safety net to detect hangs, but to
>> adjust loop counts etc. for exercising races.
>
> the only files i see using TIMEOUT directly:
> - malloc/tst-malloc-thread-exit.c:
>   - defines TIMEOUT to 7
>   - runs the test for (TIMEOUT - 2) seconds
> - nptl/tst-rwlock9.c
>   - defines TIMEOUT to 1000000
>   - uses define to set some structs
>   - undefines TIMEOUT and resets it to 30 before including test-skeleton
>
> the first test is the only one i can see where we don't want to use a
> higher timeout, so i'll add a comment above the define and leave it be.
> the second one looks like bogus re-use of the TIMEOUT name.
>
> what other tests were you looking at ?

Some things that have been submitted (as patches or in bug reports),
but apparently not yet comitted. :)

In other words, if you think it's okay to have the occasional outlier
like tst-malloc-thread-exit, I'm fine with increasing the timeout.