Re: [PULL 10/38] tests/qtest/migration: Add a test for the analyze-migration script

[Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>]

Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:

> On 21/05/2024 14.46, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>> Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> writes:
>> 
>>> Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> From: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>
>>>>
>>>> Add a smoke test that migrates to a file and gives it to the
>>>> script. It should catch the most annoying errors such as changes in
>>>> the ram flags.
>>>>
>>>> After code has been merged it becomes way harder to figure out what is
>>>> causing the script to fail, the person making the change is the most
>>>> likely to know right away what the problem is.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>
>>>> Acked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>>>> Message-ID: <20231009184326.15777-7-farosas@suse.de>
>>>
>>> I bisected the failures I'm seeing on s390x to the introduction of this
>>> script. I don't know if its simply a timeout on a relatively slow VM:
>> 
>> What's the range of your bisect? That test has been disabled and then
>> reenabled on s390x. It could be tripping the bisect.
>> 
>> 04131e0009 ("tests/qtest/migration-test: Disable the analyze-migration.py test on s390x")
>> 81c2c9dd5d ("tests/qtest/migration-test: Fix analyze-migration.py for s390x")
>> 
>> I don't think that test itself could be timing out. It's a very simple
>> test. It runs a migration and then uses the output to validate the
>> script.
>
> Agreed, the analyze-migration.py is unlikely to be the issue - especially 
> since it seems to have been disabled again in commit 6f0771de903b ...
> Fabiano, why did you disable it here again? The reason is not mentioned in 
> the commit description.

Your patch 81c2c9dd5d was merged between my v1 and v2 on the list and I
didn't notice so I messed up the rebase. I'll send a patch soon to fix
that.