From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48669) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RchRM-0000RB-9v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:56:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RchRH-0006QB-N2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:55:56 -0500 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:58940) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RchRH-0006Pz-KD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:55:51 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e9.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:55:49 -0500 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id pBJHtjlw320050 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:55:46 -0500 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id pBJHtigh030332 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:55:45 -0200 Message-ID: <4EEF7A9E.4090307@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:55:42 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4EEF70B4.3070109@us.ibm.com> <4EEF76CD.1040202@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4EEF76CD.1040202@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] qemu-test: a set of tests scripts for QEMU List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: "lmr@redhat.com" , Dor Laor , Gerd Hoffmann , qemu-devel , Stefan Hajnoczi On 12/19/2011 11:39 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 12/19/2011 07:13 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've published a set of tests I wrote over the weekend on qemu.org. >> My motivations were 1) to prevent regressions like the libguestfs one >> and 2) to have an easier way to do development testing as I work on >> QEMU Object Model. >> >> Now before sending the obligatory, "What about using KVM autotest" >> reply, note that this is significantly different than KVM autotest and >> really occupies a different use-case. >> > > The consensus of that future thread is that kvm-autotest needs to be > able to driver qemu-test, with longer repeat counts where appropriate. Ack. I'm happy to help make the driver work too. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > This is similar to kvm-unit-tests btw, that too is a standalone project, > with some glue magic in kvm-autotest. And they lived happily ever after. >