On 1/3/23 10:57, Alex Bennée wrote:
Thomas Huth writes:
On 28/02/2023 20.06, Alex Bennée wrote:
This test is exceptionally heavyweight (nearly 330s) compared to the
two (both endians) TuxRun baseline tests which complete in under 160s.
The coverage is slightly reduced but a more directed tes
Thomas Huth writes:
> On 28/02/2023 20.06, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> This test is exceptionally heavyweight (nearly 330s) compared to the
>> two (both endians) TuxRun baseline tests which complete in under 160s.
>> The coverage is slightly reduced but a more directed test could make
>> up the diffe
On 28/02/2023 20.06, Alex Bennée wrote:
This test is exceptionally heavyweight (nearly 330s) compared to the
two (both endians) TuxRun baseline tests which complete in under 160s.
The coverage is slightly reduced but a more directed test could make
up the difference.
tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselin
On 28/2/23 20:06, Alex Bennée wrote:
This test is exceptionally heavyweight (nearly 330s) compared to the
two (both endians) TuxRun baseline tests which complete in under 160s.
The coverage is slightly reduced but a more directed test could make
up the difference.
tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.
This test is exceptionally heavyweight (nearly 330s) compared to the
two (both endians) TuxRun baseline tests which complete in under 160s.
The coverage is slightly reduced but a more directed test could make
up the difference.
tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py:TuxRunBaselineTest.test_ppc64:
Over
