On Tue Feb 3 19:13:43 2026 +0000, Elizabeth Figura wrote:
I do always run interactive tests for modules which I'm working on or reviewing, although I haven't run a full test run. I think I've also hidden a couple of tests behind INTERACTIVE which are valuable but impossible to write without being a little flaky (the blocking send tests in ws2_32 in particular come to mind). IMO tests are meant to be run regularly or are otherwise meaningless and doomed to bitrot and fail without anybody noticing. As our testing policy is generally designed around testing MRs and nightly runs of the test suite in non-interactive mode, I don't see much value in interactive tests. People may run a couple of tests in interactive mode but nobody will run the entire test suite when reviewing.
I could find an "extended" test suite useful, but only if it's run regularly. If it is so much more expensive that we can't afford running it in MRs and nightly runs, I kind of doubt we can do that? If necessary I think we could perhaps consider increasing the test timeouts on a case-by-case basis, but it's usually better to try to find some interesting test subset rather than being exhaustive. Looking at the change here I would say that testing the entire parameter matrix seems a bit overkill, and only varying over one dimension at a time would be enough? -- https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/9694#note_128697