From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues Subject: Re: [KVM-autotest][PATCH] cgroup test with KVM guest +first subtests Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:41:10 -0300 Message-ID: <4E7CC4B6.2040405@redhat.com> References: <1316708986-12045-1-git-send-email-ldoktor@redhat.com> <4E7C8B72.20404@redhat.com> <4E7C9F74.4050408@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: autotest@test.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-autotest@redhat.com, akong@redhat.com, jzupka@redhat.com To: =?UTF-8?B?THVrw6HFoSBEb2t0b3I=?= Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:7729 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751181Ab1IWRlN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:41:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4E7C9F74.4050408@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri 23 Sep 2011 12:02:12 PM BRT, Luk=C3=A1=C5=A1 Doktor wrote: > Dne 23.9.2011 15:36, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues napsal(a): >> On 09/22/2011 01:29 PM, Lukas Doktor wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> Do you remember the discussion about cgroup testing in autotest vs.= =20 >>> LTP? I hope there won't be any doubts about this one as ground_test= =20 >>> (+ first 2 subtests) are strictly focused on cgroups features=20 >>> enforced on KVM guest systems. Also more subtests will follow if yo= u=20 >>> approve the test structure (blkio_throttle, memory, cpus...). >> >> Yes, absolutely. >> >>> >>> No matter whether we drop or keep the general 'cgroup' test. The=20 >>> 'cgroup_common.py' library can be imported either from=20 >>> 'client/tests/cgroup/' directory or directly from=20 >>> 'client/tests/kvm/tests/' directory. >> >> I don't think we really need to drop the test. It's useful anyway,=20 >> even though there are LTP tests that sort of cover ir. > Well I have some other ones in a queue. My focus is now on the KVM=20 > specific tests, but I might send couple more general cgroup tests=20 > later... > >> >>> >>> The modifications of 'cgroup_common.py' library is backward=20 >>> compatible with general cgroup test. >>> >>> See the commits for details. >> >> Now that we moved to github, I'd like to go with the following model= =20 >> of contribution: >> >> 1) You create a user on github if you don't have one >> 2) Create a public autotest fork >> 3) Commit the changes to a topic branch appropriately named >> 4) Make a pull request to autotest:master >> 5) You still send the patches to the mailing list normally, but=20 >> mention the pull request URL on the message. >> >> That's it, we are still trying out things, so if this doesn't work=20 >> out, we'll update the process. Is it possible that you do that and=20 >> rebase your patches? >> >> Oh, and since patchwork is still out due to DNS outage, could you=20 >> guys re-spin your client-server patches using the same process I=20 >> mentioned? Thank you! >> >> Lucas > > Hi Lucas, > > pull request sent: > https://github.com/autotest/autotest/pull/6 > > I'll remind Ji=C5=99=C3=AD to do the same with the client-server patc= hes... > > Cheers, > Luk=C3=A1=C5=A1 Hi Lukas, I've made comments on your pull request and I'm waiting on your=20 changes. Now, I need to figure out if there's a way to cc a mailing=20 list on pull requests... Still figuring out how the workflow will look like from now on, let's=20 see how it goes.