[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH v2 12/22] qemu-iotests/199: fix style

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/22] qemu-iotests/199: fix style
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:03:03 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0

On 2/17/20 9:02 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
Mostly, satisfy pep8 complains.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
  tests/qemu-iotests/199 | 13 +++++++------
  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

With none of your series applied, I get:

$ ./check -qcow2 199
199 not run [16:52:34] [16:52:34] not suitable for this cache mode: writeback
Not run: 199
Passed all 0 iotests
199 fail [16:53:37] [16:53:37] output mismatch (see 199.out.bad) --- /home/eblake/qemu/tests/qemu-iotests/199.out 2020-07-23 16:48:56.275529368 -0500 +++ /home/eblake/qemu/build/tests/qemu-iotests/199.out.bad 2020-07-23 16:53:37.728416207 -0500
@@ -1,5 +1,13 @@
+ERROR: test_postcopy (__main__.TestDirtyBitmapPostcopyMigration)
+Traceback (most recent call last):
+  File "199", line 41, in setUp
+    os.mkfifo(fifo)
+FileExistsError: [Errno 17] File exists
 Ran 1 tests

+FAILED (errors=1)
Failures: 199
Failed 1 of 1 iotests

Ah, 'scratch/mig_fifo' was left over from some other aborted run of the test. I removed that file (which implies it might be nice if the test handled that automatically, instead of making me do it), and tried again; now I got the desired:

199      pass       [17:00:34] [17:01:48]  74s
Passed all 1 iotests

After trying to rebase your series, I once again got failures, but that could mean I botched the rebase (since quite a few of the code patches earlier in the series were non-trivially changed). If you send a v3 (which would be really nice!), I'd hoist this and 13/22 first in the series, to get to a point where testing 199 works, to then make it easier to demonstrate what the rest of the 199 enhancements do in relation to the non-iotest patches. But I like that you separated the 199 improvements from the code - testing-wise, it's easy to apply the iotests patches first, make sure it fails, then apply the code patches, and make sure it passes, to prove that the enhanced test now covers what the code fixes did.

Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

reply via email to

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