[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 03/10] iotests: add test-case to 165 to test
From: |
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 03/10] iotests: add test-case to 165 to test reopening qcow2 bitmaps to RW |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Sep 2019 07:28:37 +0000 |
27.09.2019 1:57, John Snow wrote:
>
>
> On 8/7/19 10:12 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> Reopening bitmaps to RW was broken prior to previous commit. Check that
>> it works now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> tests/qemu-iotests/165 | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> tests/qemu-iotests/165.out | 4 ++--
>> 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/165 b/tests/qemu-iotests/165
>> index 88f62d3c6d..dd93b5a2d0 100755
>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/165
>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/165
>> @@ -43,10 +43,10 @@ class TestPersistentDirtyBitmap(iotests.QMPTestCase):
>> os.remove(disk)
>>
>> def mkVm(self):
>> - return iotests.VM().add_drive(disk)
>> + return iotests.VM().add_drive(disk, opts='node-name=node0')
>>
>> def mkVmRo(self):
>> - return iotests.VM().add_drive(disk, opts='readonly=on')
>> + return iotests.VM().add_drive(disk,
>> opts='readonly=on,node-name=node0')
>>
>> def getSha256(self):
>> result = self.vm.qmp('x-debug-block-dirty-bitmap-sha256',
>> @@ -102,5 +102,47 @@ class TestPersistentDirtyBitmap(iotests.QMPTestCase):
>>
>> self.vm.shutdown()
>>
>> + def test_reopen_rw(self):
>> + self.vm = self.mkVm()
>> + self.vm.launch()
>> + self.qmpAddBitmap()
>> +
>> + # Calculate sha256 corresponding to regions1
>> + self.writeRegions(regions1)
>> + sha256 = self.getSha256()
>> + result = self.vm.qmp('block-dirty-bitmap-clear', node='drive0',
>> + name='bitmap0')
>> + self.assert_qmp(result, 'return', {})
>> +
>> + self.vm.shutdown()
>> +
>> + self.vm = self.mkVmRo()
>> + self.vm.launch()
>> +
>> + # We've loaded empty bitmap
>> + assert sha256 != self.getSha256()
>> +
>> + # Check that we are in RO mode
>> + self.writeRegions(regions1)
>> + assert sha256 != self.getSha256()
>> +
>
> the HMP monitor lets you attempt writes to a Read Only drive...? Or does
> it error out and we just don't check the reply?
It must fail and we check this by comparing dirty bitmap hash.
>
> I would prefer we use an actual dirty sector count here instead; we have
> the new API that should make it easy to do.
>
> If the debug SHA changes this might be a little fragile.
Hmm, I agree that checking that bitmap is empty by comparing with some hash
is not very reliable. Will do.
>
> ACK otherwise.
>
>> + result = self.vm.qmp('x-blockdev-reopen', **{
>> + 'node-name': 'node0',
>> + 'driver': iotests.imgfmt,
>> + 'file': {
>> + 'driver': 'file',
>> + 'filename': disk
>> + },
>> + 'read-only': False
>> + })
>> + self.assert_qmp(result, 'return', {})
>> +
>> + # Check that bitmap is reopened to RW and we can write to it.
>> + self.writeRegions(regions1)
>> + assert sha256 == self.getSha256()
>> +
>> + self.vm.shutdown()
>> +
>> +
>> if __name__ == '__main__':
>> iotests.main(supported_fmts=['qcow2'])
>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/165.out b/tests/qemu-iotests/165.out
>> index ae1213e6f8..fbc63e62f8 100644
>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/165.out
>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/165.out
>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>> -.
>> +..
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -Ran 1 tests
>> +Ran 2 tests
>>
>> OK
>>
>
> This is a suggestion for an even more rigorous test:
>
> - Create bitmap
> - Write a region or two
> - Record the dirty count and the SHA; assert it is equal to known /
> predetermined values.
> - reopen RO
> - verify the bitmap still exists and that the hash and count are the same.
> - Stop the VM
> - Start the VM in readonly mode
> - verify the bitmap still exists and that the hash and count are the same.
> - Reopen-RW
> - verify the bitmap still exists and that the hash and count are the same.
> - Write further region(s)
> - Get the new dirty count and SHA, and assert it is equal to known /
> predetermined values.
>
OK
--
Best regards,
Vladimir