qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization test


From: Ademar Reis
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Future goals for autotest and virtualization tests
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 11:40:32 -0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 08:13:45AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/09/2012 06:48 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Look at how this discussion started.  We've been discussing testing
> on qemu-devel at excruciating length and detail and have finally
> come to something of a consensus.  AFAIK, no one from autotest has
> participated in those discussions which is fair as I'm sure ya'll
> don't read qemu-devel religiously.

The discussion started back in December and this is a follow-up
RFC based on what was said back then.

(http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-12/msg02434.html)

> 
> Then we see this note that more or less declares, this is how QEMU
> should do all of its testing.  What reaction did you really expect
> there to be? :-)

This is a clear misunderstanding: we've repeated numerous times
that libautotest and the test runner are optional. I don't know
how much I have to stress this out.

Technically speaking, the use of autotest would be enabled by
"import autotest", "source $AUTOTESTDIR/libautotest.sh" or
something similar. This can be easily detected by the test
runner, which could skip such tests if autotest is not available.

We're also offering a global test-runner that we believe will
bring advantages to anybody running tests that follow the simple
requirement of being a script returning 0/error.

> 
> >It's just that this extra stuff is potentially not interesting to the goal of
> >doing developer level regression testing of qemu alone.
> 
> I think we need to focus this discussion on concrete technical
> proposals.  If the proposal is, QEMU should use libautotest, we need
> to start with an awful lot more detail about libautotest does and
> what functions it provides.

The discussion diverged long ago. So much that the initial test
examples, bootstrap procedure, directory structure, test runner
output, and our request for requiements was all kind of
forgotten.

Anyway, we'll keep working on autotest targeting the other
projects which will benefit from it. As I said in the other
e-mail, we'll probably revisit this topic in the KVM forum in
person, with more code to show and hopefully with some beers
around us. :-)

Cheers,
  - Ademar

-- 
Ademar de Souza Reis Jr.
Red Hat

^[:wq!



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]