Re: [PATCH v1 01/18] iotests: Fix 051 output after qdev_init_nofail() removal

["Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>]

John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com> writes:

> On 6/22/20 10:31 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>> 
>> Commit 96927c744 replaced qdev_init_nofail() call by
>> isa_realize_and_unref() which has a different error
>> message. Update the test output accordingly.
>> 
>> Gitlab CI error after merging b77b5b3dc7:
>> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/jobs/597414772#L4375
>> 
>> Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>> Message-Id: <20200616154949.6586-1-philmd@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  tests/qemu-iotests/051.pc.out | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/051.pc.out b/tests/qemu-iotests/051.pc.out
>> index 0ea80d35f0e..da8ad871876 100644
>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/051.pc.out
>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/051.pc.out
>> @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>>  
>>  Testing: -drive if=ide
>>  QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>> -(qemu) QEMU_PROG: Initialization of device ide-hd failed: Device needs media, but drive is empty
>> +(qemu) QEMU_PROG: Device needs media, but drive is empty
>>  
>>  Testing: -drive if=virtio
>>  QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>> @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>>  
>>  Testing: -drive file=TEST_DIR/t.qcow2,if=ide,readonly=on
>>  QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>> -(qemu) QEMU_PROG: Initialization of device ide-hd failed: Block node is read-only
>> +(qemu) QEMU_PROG: Block node is read-only
>>  
>>  Testing: -drive file=TEST_DIR/t.qcow2,if=virtio,readonly=on
>>  QEMU X.Y.Z monitor - type 'help' for more information
>> 
>
> Just ran into this and wrote an identical fix. The error is not in
> 051.out so the pc-only fix appears to be fine.
>
> Reviewed-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
>
> (There seem to be other problems with the CI at the moment, but the
> failures I am seeing are not related to this, so I think it's probably fine)

It's queued via Max's tree - it's just easier to keep them in
testing/next while I'm testing. I assume his PR will beat the eventual
PR from this.

-- 
Alex Bennée