From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46198) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpABa-0008G2-JV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 05:30:27 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dpABT-0007oF-1j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2017 05:30:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 11:29:52 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20170905092952.GD4633@localhost.localdomain> References: <20170901105434.3288-1-berrange@redhat.com> <20170901105434.3288-2-berrange@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="envbJBWh7q8WU6mo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] iotests: rewrite 192 to use _launch_qemu to fix LUKS support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org, Max Reitz , Stefan Hajnoczi , Fam Zheng --envbJBWh7q8WU6mo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 01.09.2017 um 16:22 hat Eric Blake geschrieben: > On 09/01/2017 05:54 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > The LUKS driver requires extra args to QEMU to setup passwords. > > The _launch_qemu function takes care of this, so convert the > > test to use this function and use correct -drive syntax > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange > > --- > > tests/qemu-iotests/192 | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >=20 >=20 > > =20 > > -{ > > -echo "nbd_server_start unix:$TEST_DIR/nbd" > > -echo "nbd_server_add -w drive0" > > -echo "q" > > -} | $QEMU -nodefaults -display none -monitor stdio \ > > - -drive format=3D$IMGFMT,file=3D$TEST_IMG,if=3Dide,id=3Ddrive0 \ > > - -incoming defer 2>&1 | _filter_testdir | _filter_qemu | _filter_hmp >=20 > Can this test use QMP instead of HMP? But that's an independent question. As far as I am concerned, there is nothing wrong with having HMP tests. HMP commands already call QMP internally (except for the generic QMP code path below the command handlers), so using HMP actually increases the test coverage in most cases. We should try to have a good mix of test cases using QMP and test cases using HMP. Kevin --envbJBWh7q8WU6mo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJZrm6QAAoJEH8JsnLIjy/WyLUP/1pTfSblCkIbWsyrjVSV0r7u pjsRr6BUqN9dnZT9yLzSssDL47Jyl4G6bZyXVAaWcwjqXCiN2wZguYYpdJ9WeAqC TCe+FuzpxWj05Kg7y55lUD4AmimGhKCWXxZx5Z427HA6Ntq0JHsKOga2rKHL4b5L fcaWrdXoCHk45O2aN/EmQRAqL/JfaIlvB8OEdtIh08hwUJyT+wm5O60D1sXcIdtS KwKcESQyFtzjy264HHP1CSNyi8kzhhE4F4BvtNaAfmgQacNCJGVrmMTjBLPMETSW Maossco74r3x6YPSxEU6EnK1cydEtAj9rx2IL7q26ij4PU7rHDz9p4+5Vw2TPQuC TKCOXCZd3n3uaFh1kr7gap8MMw7T88/OROciWDDLStmGYt5jAXef5N62jtn84XR2 tr6hr+HtnMicDm/3qL2L9FiEsDyn3uTzPKFdcRSD5MZ3ry3x8ka7TaNg+9AKdYrf CHtY0PTl9zDDAwCJonHcR8gwuwSVouLsvur9Hp3aBpKZHpH44jO0PUjqFSUusqlX s4QGxtZ1E37wblwAQyVd4cf18UYNiRc7Pu4RtooEuvErFFnKvgnLMiZnPU5PbiVE Gqe8jTpNuPu34S1IweBgCSmXsRwLSAxHaNns+ldlNLvcQuV3DTOpoCyaZdly3abf /dKH2mk6NetM75cpOhMF =Q6ui -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --envbJBWh7q8WU6mo--