From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56485) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1euqzm-0007m8-TD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 21:45:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1euqzj-0005qt-Qi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 21:45:58 -0500 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:34358 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1euqzj-0005q9-Ls for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 21:45:55 -0500 References: <20180309090006.10018-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20180309090006.10018-23-peterx@redhat.com> From: Eric Blake Message-ID: <43e12d53-0bbf-b485-6c99-05cec63804ab@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2018 20:45:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180309090006.10018-23-peterx@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v8 22/23] tests: qmp-test: verify command batching List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Xu , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , "Daniel P . Berrange" , Paolo Bonzini , Fam Zheng , Juan Quintela , mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Laurent Vivier , Markus Armbruster , marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" On 03/09/2018 03:00 AM, Peter Xu wrote: > OOB introduced DROP event for flow control. This should not affect old > QMP clients. Add a command batching check to make sure of it. > > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu > --- > tests/qmp-test.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > > > + /* > + * Test command batching. In current test OOB is not enabled, we > + * should be able to run as many commands in batch as we like. > + * Using 16 (>8, which is OOB queue length) to make sure OOB won't > + * break existing clients. Note: this test does not control the > + * scheduling of QEMU's QMP command processing threads so it may > + * not really trigger batching inside QEMU. This is just a > + * best-effort test. > + */ > + for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { > + qtest_async_qmp(qts, "{ 'execute': 'query-version' }"); Would the test be any more robust if we could generate a single string to send all at once, rather than multiple separate calls to qtest_async_qmp() (the overhead in generating separate strings means the monitor may have made progress before we send the next string). But that can be a followup, if you want to pursue the idea. > + } > + /* Verify the replies to make sure no command is dropped. */ > + for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { > + resp = qtest_qmp_receive(qts); > + /* It should never be dropped. Each of them should be a reply. */ > + g_assert(qdict_haskey(resp, "return")); > + g_assert(!qdict_haskey(resp, "event")); > + QDECREF(resp); Should we also be sending unique ids, and ensure that the responses arrive with ids in the same order? Again, idea for a followup. Reviewed-by: Eric Blake -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org