From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38361) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bs8gp-0000ml-L9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2016 09:26:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bs8gl-0008Hz-Er for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2016 09:26:22 -0400 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20160922203927.28241-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <20160922203927.28241-4-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <8760p7yv8n.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <934105962.522999.1475662607447.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <87bmyzvuqn.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <1233045948.581343.1475672578009.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <87lgy2rhc1.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <777361253.639586.1475680444331.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2016 15:26:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <777361253.639586.1475680444331.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau"'s message of "Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:14:04 -0400 (EDT)") Message-ID: <87a8ehhamg.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 3/3] tests: start generic qemu-qmp tests List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , paolo bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-stable@nongnu.org Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: > Hi > > ----- Original Message ----- >> Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau writes: >>=20 >> > Hi >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > -snip- >> > >> >>=20 >> >> I'd be willing to take this as is with a suitable TODO comment >> >> explaining where we want to go with this file. Perhaps >> >>=20 >> >> /* >> >> * This program tests QMP commands that aren't interesting enough to >> >> * warrant their own test program. >> >> * >> >> * TODO The tests we got here now aren't good examples, because they >> >> * don't really exercise the commands, but only demonstrate specific >> >> * bugs we've fixed. >> >> */ >> >>=20 >> >> What do you think? >> > >> > It looks like a comment that may stale. I have a few tests in some wip >> > branch that will go naturally there, so I hope it won't remain bug-fix >> > only checks. I can't say how long it will take to get there though, so= I >> > am fine with a comment anyway, perhaps without TODO? >> > >> > thanks >>=20 >> Since you got more tests coming up, we have several workable options: >>=20 >> (1) Delay this patch until we got more substantial tests. I'm wary of >> rejecting the imperfect solution I can have now for a better >> solution I might get some day, but since you already got something >> better in the pipeline, I'd be happy to wait in this case. >>=20 >> (2) Apply it now, with my TODO. Adding tests should eventually resolve >> the TODO. If we forget to delete it then, it'll go stale. But >> it'll be pretty obviously stale. >>=20 >> (3) Apply it now, without my TODO. Until we acquire tests that would >> resolve the TODO, the file is an unmarked bad example. >>=20 >> I like (1) better than (2), because it's less churn, and I don't expect >> to lose anything. (3) my least favourite option, because I prefer maybe >> having an obviously stale TODO in the future over having an umarked bad >> example now. > > Please go for 2, the other series is unrelated and I don't know when I am= going to send it. > > thanks Done. Also: rename to tests/qmp-test.c, cover in MAINTAINERS.