Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization tests

[Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com>]

On 03/09/2012 09:04 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/09/2012 05:20 AM, Cleber Rosa wrote:
>>>> You're comparing developer-level tests with the existent QA-level
>>>> tests (much more complex).
>>>
>>> Let's be specific then. Look at device-add.sh in qemu-test. It's 71LOC.
>>> pci_hotplug.py in autotest is 204LOC.
>>
>> pci_hotplug.py does much more than device-add.sh:
>>
>> * tests both pci_add and device_add commands
>> * checks the monitor syntax for adding a new drive, that is, it works 
>> on HEAD
>> and on other versions (such as the ones in some RHEL releases);
>> * tests both nic and block hotplug
>> * for block, tests with both virtio and scsi
>> * also does device removal, both for pci_add and device_add syntaxes
>
> Ok, but clearly, there's no magic in autotest that makes this 
> sufficiently easier.  It's just a matter of:
>
> cmd=`named_choose command device_add pci_add`
>
> if test $cmd = "device_add"; then
>   qmp device_add --driver=virtio-blk-pci --drive=hd0
> else
>   hmp pci_add auto virtio-blk-pci,drive=hd0
> fi
>
> It's not there today because pci_add is deprecated.  There assertion 
> was that autotest makes it easier to write tests.  How does it make it 
> easier to write pci_hotplug?
>

Sure. I agree that it's fair from QEMU's PoV alone to forget about 
legacy things such as pci_add.

On this particular example, the one thing that strikes me the most is 
that (kvm-)autotest allows either a very static test run (as 
device_add.sh does), or a very configurable test run (as pci_hotplug.py 
does and QE needs).

I believe that with little compromises (required by any kind of 
collaboration) we can have the best 
tests/tools/libraries/framework/whatever by combining these similar code 
bases.

Again, we're willing to work and try to make that happen, but IMHO there 
must be a more open attitude here.

Cheers,
CR.

> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori