From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52332) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5zBp-0005TX-BI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:45:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5zBk-0002Hi-Hl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:44:56 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32304) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5zBk-0002Hb-A0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:44:52 -0500 Message-ID: <4F59FB9E.8010606@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 09:46:22 -0300 From: Cleber Rosa MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120308144958.GA25750@t420s.optimusnet> <4F58C897.5020405@codemonkey.ws> <20120308150722.GA30576@t420s.optimusnet> <4F58CCBA.9000702@codemonkey.ws> <20120308160505.GA32360@t420s.optimusnet> <4F58E67A.3050708@codemonkey.ws> <20120308175907.GA4900@t420s.optimusnet> <4F5905AA.3060304@codemonkey.ws> <20120308210209.GA11998@t420s.optimusnet> <4F59237F.6010406@codemonkey.ws> <20120308222433.GB11998@t420s.optimusnet> <4F593F08.8050606@codemonkey.ws> <4F59E77B.7080806@redhat.com> <4F59F1C7.5000008@codemonkey.ws> <4F59FA25.8060305@redhat.com> <4F59FAA8.5010204@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4F59FAA8.5010204@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization tests Reply-To: cleber@redhat.com List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues , Scott Zawalski , Ademar Reis , QEMU devel , cleber@redhat.com On 03/09/2012 09:42 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 03/09/2012 06:40 AM, Cleber Rosa wrote: >> 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). > > With named_choose and profiles, you can actually configure it very > specifically. Most of the tests are not using named_choose right now, > but it's easy enough to change that. And then the two code bases will end up having even more similar features, similar complexity, etc. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori