Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] exec: silence hugetlbfs warning under qtest

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 06:40:58PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/11/2015 21:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:02:58AM +0100, address@hidden wrote:
> >> From: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
> >>
> >> vhost-user-test prints a warning. A test should not need to run on
> >> hugetlbfs, let's silence the warning under qtest. The
> >> condition can't check on qtest_enabled() since vhost-user-test actually
> >> doesn't use qtest accel. However, qtest_driver() can be used, if
> >> qtest_init() is called early enough. For that reason, move chardev and
> >> qtest initialization early.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
> > 
> > Seems ok, and let us bring back the 2.4 test that was
> > dropped in 2.5, but I'd like an ack on this from someone else.
> 
> I wonder if we need the warning at all, but this patch is okay.
> 
> Anyhow:
> 
> 
> 
> -    if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("object"),
> -                          object_create,
> -                          object_create_initial, NULL)) {
> +    if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("chardev"),
> +                          chardev_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
>          exit(1);
>      }
> 
> -    if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("chardev"),
> -                          chardev_init_func, NULL, NULL)) {
> +    if (qtest_chrdev) {
> +        Error *local_err = NULL;
> +        qtest_init(qtest_chrdev, qtest_log, &local_err);
> +        if (local_err) {
> +            error_report_err(local_err);
> +            exit(1);
> +        }
> +    }
> +
> +    if (qemu_opts_foreach(qemu_find_opts("object"),
> +                          object_create,
> +                          object_create_initial, NULL)) {
>          exit(1);
>      }
> 
> 
> Before: object-initial, chardev, qtest, object-late (not in the patch)
> 
> After: chardev, qtest, object-initial, object-late (not in the patch)
> 
> Objects must be initialized before chardev (except rng-egd) since in the
> future chardev will need to use objects, in particular secret objects.
> Was the swap intentional?

Yeah, that is essentially reverting my patch to split up object
creation:

  commit f08f9271bfe3f19a5eb3d7a2f48532065304d5c8
  Author: Daniel P. Berrange <address@hidden>
  Date:   Wed May 13 17:14:04 2015 +0100

    vl: Create (most) objects before creating chardev backends

So I'd rather we did not do that. IMHO having the goal that all
objects be created first is the right long term direction, if
we view the future as being 100% object based. Hence most of the
object types are created on object-initial, and only a few things
in object-late.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|