Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu-iotests: Add -nographic when starting QEMU in 120

[tu bo <tubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Hi Max:

On 11/21/2015 12:17 AM, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 20.11.2015 10:35, Fam Zheng wrote:
>> Otherwise, a window flashes on my desktop (built with SDL). Other
>> iotest cases have that.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/qemu-iotests/120 | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/120 b/tests/qemu-iotests/120
>> index 9f13078..d899a3f 100755
>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/120
>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/120
>> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ echo "{'execute': 'qmp_capabilities'}
>>         {'execute': 'human-monitor-command',
>>          'arguments': {'command-line': 'qemu-io drv \"write -P 42 0 64k\"'}}
>>         {'execute': 'quit'}" \
>> -    | $QEMU -qmp stdio -nodefaults \
>> +    | $QEMU -qmp stdio -nographic -nodefaults \
>>               -drive id=drv,if=none,file="$TEST_IMG",driver=raw,file.driver=$IMGFMT \
>>       | _filter_qmp | _filter_qemu_io
>>   $QEMU_IO -c 'read -P 42 0 64k' "$TEST_IMG" | _filter_qemu_io
>>
>
> This is the same patch as
> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-11/msg00623.html,
> but while both are correct, both need to fix 119, too, I think.
>
> (And while I would be fine with merging this and then taking a follow-up
> patch, I don't think we need to hurry for 2.5. Releases and iotests
> don't really care about each other, other than that we should pass all
> the iotests before a release unless we know what's wrong and don't care.)
>

thanks for your advice. I plan to fix 119 in a follow-up patch. 
currently, 119 is notrun for s390x, and I hope to spend some time to 
investigate it later.

> Max
>