From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51085) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RgJER-0003h9-8q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:53:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RgJEQ-0005Ww-Ao for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:53:31 -0500 Received: from mail-yx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]:61718) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RgJEQ-0005Wl-8M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:53:30 -0500 Received: by yenm6 with SMTP id m6so8956740yen.4 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 08:53:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4EFC9B05.3060606@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 10:53:25 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4EEF70B4.3070109@us.ibm.com> <4EF73EF5.8050606@redhat.com> <4EF88EC0.8020301@codemonkey.ws> <4EF8FC88.70809@redhat.com> <4EFA4829.4000207@redhat.com> <4EFA80EA.3050405@codemonkey.ws> <4EFAA2A2.4000107@redhat.com> <4EFB2764.7040006@codemonkey.ws> <4EFB2F36.2090408@redhat.com> <4EFB46DD.4000905@codemonkey.ws> <4EFB5014.9030609@redhat.com> <4EFC94A9.1040300@codemonkey.ws> <4EFC994C.9030205@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4EFC994C.9030205@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" , Stefan Hajnoczi , cleber@redhat.com, dlaor@redhat.com, qemu-devel , Gerd Hoffmann , Cleber Rosa On 12/29/2011 10:46 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 12/29/2011 06:26 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>>> I don't want to write a TCP/IP stack. We aren't just grabbing a >>>> random distro kernel. We're building one from scratch configured in a >>>> specific way. >>> >>> How does that help? >> >> Not sure I understand the question. >> > > In what way is your specifically configured kernel's TCP stack better > than the random distro's kernel's? I firmly believe that with qtest we'll end up eventually building a libOS to make it easier to write qtest tests. Overtime, that libOS will become increasingly complex up until the point where it approaches something that feels like an actual OS. Effort spent developing libOS is a cost to building test cases. By using Linux and a minimal userspace as our libOS, we can avoid spending a lot of time building a sophisticated libOS. If we need advanced libOS features, we just use qemu-test. If it's just a matter of poking some registers on a device along, we just use qtest. Guest neutral tests that are meant to run on Linux, Windows, etc. are in a completely different ballpark. Regards, Anthony Liguori