From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5127CC3DA79 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 23:29:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rPWO4-0004K3-Ga; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:29:00 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rPWO1-0004Js-2R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:28:57 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rPWNy-0002UW-Dl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:28:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1705361330; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Pc0WzwQhWoYlHV9r6po0htrfark34bjBrdXxDbBifcw=; b=cSecHbWg5hbAWRsOolrRUd78eCw/jubuHtV1EfjoKwK+evhagGiYT4SyEC5h0aZHt5qIyW RvCDspfcq0Paw9GOE4D11FokAZo/GqLjxKP9P9AJmwlUR9xi73Kbc793C47dLxvJ+DoVQF DmWIP1LpMLt1hr6JtyaGhtzfWr1T5n4= Received: from mail-pl1-f197.google.com (mail-pl1-f197.google.com [209.85.214.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-643-z4KbLx0NMBmknjqE7vybaw-1; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 18:28:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: z4KbLx0NMBmknjqE7vybaw-1 Received: by mail-pl1-f197.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1d5a4416df4so10030005ad.0 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:28:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705361328; x=1705966128; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Pc0WzwQhWoYlHV9r6po0htrfark34bjBrdXxDbBifcw=; b=wIoaLRN8avVCxNoTnFQ0WJEc9VpHa5k78zSykVwN/5RvNTKDA/NdETfTedws6NEH8E DyDFHEiLmfZVzOueEH+I2reSdtn3zUMenMVWsYBcFmliJsal4fO4dfoS7r3RI4p+qYnZ RHUTH6fxvgkRv6Hn6fMeB4s3dBYkGp0xW62gdb831fYHcGQPD7ftHosVGTsd0fGKI6iw flD0rP348f5tSk5I2NZ99hoMbqkcDEnqHbsMdvD0P4NqXGPSbjJZ9tXS4ua0+ZkSQ7hz dOM2+VF6IftKDOUXu6sW1C2P9DwyMgMGvrmWRfOB1zjuab0zbxxNbGRjzhzQA0ccYyLR CwoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzDNoy1iMYHLLNrGw0oUTNYRxjhBpRlm3lQSivfzkRnleShzeCW ibUwQrFfgjPmX7n/BB6cGC+7zaAaT9BwsoahIlArv9i1lLdkBxQ3E/3ZN65DigyLUUmxBfrf4Sb i9q1kA+Kr4vxV39FuuygISUc= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d50d:b0:1d5:4c03:9988 with SMTP id b13-20020a170902d50d00b001d54c039988mr12513911plg.2.1705361328164; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:28:48 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF6V0UyEqr72gLdF+RDIyhFKT9IbA7rgLZbDgpm3U66mgdmBgTo+DSKnvxWmrB57tf4RpuN1A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d50d:b0:1d5:4c03:9988 with SMTP id b13-20020a170902d50d00b001d54c039988mr12513900plg.2.1705361327882; Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:28:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from x1n ([43.228.180.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n15-20020a170902e54f00b001d3ef57d937sm8139524plf.18.2024.01.15.15.28.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:28:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:28:41 +0800 From: Peter Xu To: Fabiano Rosas Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Daniel P =?utf-8?B?LiBCZXJyYW5nw6k=?= , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Thomas Huth , Laurent Vivier , Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] [NOT FOR MERGE] tests/qtest/migration: Adapt tests to use older QEMUs Message-ID: References: <877ckj3kfp.fsf@suse.de> <87zfxe7eev.fsf@suse.de> <87zfxd6yid.fsf@suse.de> <874jfknf8m.fsf@suse.de> <87bk9m677m.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87bk9m677m.fsf@suse.de> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=peterx@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.531, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 10:45:33AM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote: > > IMHO the n-1 tests are not for this. The new FOO cap can only be enabled > > in n+ versions anyway, so something like above should be covered by the > > normal migration test that anyone would like to propose the new FOO cap. > > You're being too generous in thinking new code will always restrict > itself to implementing new functionality and never have a bug that > affects a completly different part of the code. There could be an > innocent refactoring along with cap FOO that breaks the migration only > when FOO is enabled. The question is even if we run cross-binary migration-test with current version ("n") we can't detect such issue, right? Because afaiu with that we need to let migration-test always understand qemu versions, and it should skip the new test that will enable FOO for cross-binary test since it should detect the old binary doesn't support it. > > But fine. We can't predict every scenario. Let's get this series out the > door. > > Thanks for the comments so far. I'll spin another version. Yes if you think that is a good start point, we can start from simple. That's so far the only solution I can think of that has mostly zero maintanence burden for the tests meanwhile hopefully start to cover some spots for us. Said that, the discussion can keep going no matter what. -- Peter Xu