Re: [Autotest] [PATCH] [RFC] KVM test: Major control file cleanup

From: Yolkfull Chow <yzhou@redhat.com>
To: Michael Goldish <mgoldish@redhat.com>
Cc: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues <lmr@redhat.com>,
	autotest@test.kernel.org, uril@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Autotest] [PATCH] [RFC] KVM test: Major control file cleanup
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:25:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091104072554.GB2355@aFu.nay.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1591861314.1166411256753099182.JavaMail.root@zmail05.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com>

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 02:04:59PM -0400, Michael Goldish wrote:
> 
> ----- "Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues" <lmr@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Michael Goldish <mgoldish@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Sounds great, except it won't allow you to debug your configuration
> > > using kvm_config.py.  So the question now is what's more important
> > --
> > > the ability to debug or ease of use when running from the server.
> > 
> > Here we have 2 use cases:
> > 
> > 1) Users of the web interface, that (hopefully) have canned test sets
> > that work reliably. Ability to debug stuff is less important on this
> > scenario.
> > 2) People developing tests, and in this case ability to debug config
> > is very important
> > 
> > I see the following options:
> > 
> > 1) Document as part of the "test development guide" that, in order to
> > be able to debug stuff, that all the test sets are to be written to
> > the config file and then, can be parsed using kvm_config.
> > 2) If we write all dictionaries generated by that particular
> > configuration on files inside the job results directory, we still
> > have
> > debug ability for all use cases (I am starting to like this idea very
> > much, as I type).
> > 
> > So I'd then implement option 2) and refactor the control file with
> > the
> > test sets defined inside strings in the control file, then you can
> > see
> > how it looks? How about that?
> 
> Sounds fine.
> - Where exactly will the test list appear?
> - We should also allow printing of verbose debug output ("parsing variants
> block, 9000 dicts in current context...") by passing something to the
> constructor of the config object.
> - We should make it clear to the user that he/she must rename the control
> file (to control.lucas for example) or else it may be overwritten on the
> next git-fetch or -pull.
> 
> I'm still not sure it's a great idea to make config debugging harder, so
> if anyone other than Lucas who uses the KVM test is reading this, please
> let us know if you ever use kvm_config.py and if you think the ability to
> print the list of test dicts is important.

Hi Michael,

I had used kvm_config.py for printing lists of selected test dicts
often. And I think it's necessary to keep this feature. IMHO, option 2) Lucas
proposed is a good idea. What do you think? Hope I haven't missed
something. :)

> _______________________________________________
> Autotest mailing list
> Autotest@test.kernel.org
> http://test.kernel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/autotest