From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Uri Lublin Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] kvm-autotest Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:22:23 +0300 Message-ID: <487BFBCF.7090307@qumranet.com> References: <48709B6D.6030300@qumranet.com> <20080709154357.GA6217@dmt.cnet> <4875FC00.2090205@qumranet.com> <20080712153132.GR4188@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Dror Russo To: Ryan Harper Return-path: Received: from mis011-2.exch011.intermedia.net ([64.78.21.129]:1486 "EHLO mis011-2.exch011.intermedia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760926AbYGOBZw (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:25:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080712153132.GR4188@us.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ryan Harper wrote: > * Uri Lublin [2008-07-10 07:42]: >> Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote: >>> >>> - As you mention, it should reuse the server/client model for running >>> tests inside guests. I hacked up a "kvm_autotest" test that >>> basically does: >>> >>> tests = ["linus_stress", "bash_shared_mapping", "rmaptest", "tsc", >>> "scrashme", "isic", "sleeptest", "libhugetlbfs", "..."] >>> >>> vm.ssh.scp_to_remote(autotest_tarball, '/root') >>> (s,o) = vm.ssh.ssh('tar zvxf kvm-autotest.tar.gz') >>> for i in range(0, len(tests)): >>> (s,o) = vm.ssh.ssh('kvm-autotest/client/bin/autotest ' + >>> 'kvm-autotest/client/tests/' + tests[i] + >>> '/control') >>> print(o) >>> >>> Which poorly replicates what the client/server infrastructure already >>> provides. IMO its a waste of time to write specialized client >>> tests (other than virt specific ones). >>> >> You see guests as clients and the host as the server. >> We were thinking of the host as a client and multi-host operations to be >> done by a server. guest-operations would be done using ssh (for linux >> guests) as your example above. You make a good point that we can use >> server/client infrastructure for guest operations. As it is simpler to >> write autotest client tests, and we thought most of the tests would be run >> as client tests, we want to postpone the server tests and focus on adding >> tests and guests to the matrix. > > It's definitely worth looking at the autotest server code/samples. > There exists code in-tree already to build an deploy kvm via autotest > server mode which a single machine can drive the building, installing, > creation of guests on N number of clients, directing each guest > image to run various autotest client tests, collecting all of the > results. > > See autotest/server/samples/*kvm* > > A proper server setup is a little involved[1] but much more streamlined > these days. > Let's think of a guest-installation test. Would you implement it on the server or on the client ? What do you plan for non-linux guests ? We'll try this little exercise of writing a kvm-test on the server side and on the client side and compare complexity. Thanks, Uri.