From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41916) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S61JY-00075i-4Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:01:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S61JT-0006ox-Al for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:01:03 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52823) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S61JT-0006ol-2b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:00:59 -0500 Message-ID: <4F5A1B25.6070306@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:00:53 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4F582EDB.1040608@redhat.com> <4F58B5CB.8040503@codemonkey.ws> <4F58CDEA.2020506@redhat.com> <4F59010C.2060105@codemonkey.ws> <4F5909B3.4080405@redhat.com> <4F590BD7.6030605@codemonkey.ws> <4F5913F3.3040503@redhat.com> <4F591EB4.1090300@codemonkey.ws> <4F5A076E.9040904@redhat.com> <4F5A0D49.60200@codemonkey.ws> <4F5A13FA.6040606@redhat.com> <4F5A1729.5060206@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4F5A1729.5060206@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization tests List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues , Cleber Rosa , QEMU devel , Ademar Reis Il 09/03/2012 15:43, Anthony Liguori ha scritto: > Linux is the only part that matters here. The userspace in qemu-jeos > is just there to give a small environment for Linux to function > properly in. But again that's not okay for all testcases. If I want to do SCSI tests, I cannot write them in shell scripts because qemu-jeos does not have sg3_utils. Even libos would not help; relying on sg3_utils means that the client is a completely clear reimplementation. I don't care about the extra trips to the SCSI specs that sg3_utils would save. The problem is that since qtest cannot run on real hardware, I don't have confirmation that I didn't misinterpret the standards. Writing all bits of the testsuite makes it likely to have the same misinterpretations in both the tested code and the tests, even if I try to write the tests from scratch with only the spec in front of me. > I'm skeptical of the value of this from a QEMU point of view. Do we > really care if the buildroot version of udev propagates hotplug > events correct in buildroot for ARM in a beagleboard machine? I don't care about udev. But even just binutils+GCC+kernel+uclibc is not as easy if you care about dozens of architectures. Paolo