[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate strin
From: |
Alex Bennée |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length |
Date: |
Tue, 09 Feb 2021 12:52:21 +0000 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.5.7; emacs 28.0.50 |
Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> writes:
> On 09.02.21 12:24, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>
>> Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 04.02.21 14:23, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> If the vmlinuz variable is set to anything that evaluates to True,
>>>>> then the respective arguments should be set. If the variable contains
>>>>> an empty string, than it will evaluate to False, and the extra
>>>>> arguments will not be set.
>>>>>
>>>>> This keeps the same logic, but improves readability a bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Cleber Rosa <crosa@redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py | 2 +-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py
>>>>> b/tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py
>>>>> index f1b49f03bb..f25a386a19 100644
>>>>> --- a/tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py
>>>>> +++ b/tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py
>>>>> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ class VirtiofsSubmountsTest(BootLinux):
>>>>>
>>>>> super(VirtiofsSubmountsTest, self).setUp(pubkey)
>>>>>
>>>>> - if len(vmlinuz) > 0:
>>>>> + if vmlinuz:
>>>>> self.vm.add_args('-kernel', vmlinuz,
>>>>> '-append', 'console=ttyS0 root=/dev/sda1')
>>>>
>>>> And this is were I gave up because I can't see how to run the test:
>>>>
>>>> ./tests/venv/bin/avocado run ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py
>>>> JOB ID : b3d9bfcfcd603189a471bec7d770fca3b50a81ee
>>>> JOB LOG :
>>>> /home/alex/avocado/job-results/job-2021-02-04T13.21-b3d9bfc/job.log
>>>> (1/5)
>>>> ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py:VirtiofsSubmountsTest.test_pre_virtiofsd_set_up:
>>>> CANCEL: vmlinuz parameter not set; you must point it to a Linux kernel
>>>> binary to test (to run this test with the on-image kernel, set it to an
>>>> empty string) (0.00 s)
>>>> (2/5)
>>>> ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py:VirtiofsSubmountsTest.test_pre_launch_set_up:
>>>> CANCEL: vmlinuz parameter not set; you must point it to a Linux kernel
>>>> binary to test (to run this test with the on-image kernel, set it to an
>>>> empty string) (0.00 s)
>>>> (3/5)
>>>> ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py:VirtiofsSubmountsTest.test_post_launch_set_up:
>>>> CANCEL: vmlinuz parameter not set; you must point it to a Linux kernel
>>>> binary
>>>> to test (to run this test with the on-image kernel, set it to an empty
>>>> string) (0.00 s)
>>>> (4/5)
>>>> ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py:VirtiofsSubmountsTest.test_post_mount_set_up:
>>>> CANCEL: vmlinuz parameter not set; you must point it to a Linux kernel
>>>> binary to test (to run this test with the on-image kernel, set it to an
>>>> empty string) (0.00 s)
>>>> (5/5)
>>>> ./tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py:VirtiofsSubmountsTest.test_two_runs:
>>>> CANCEL: vmlinuz parameter not set; you must point it to a Linux kernel
>>>> binary to test (to run this test with the on-image kernel, set it to an
>>>> empty string) (0.00 s)
>>>> RESULTS : PASS 0 | ERROR 0 | FAIL 0 | SKIP 0 | WARN 0 | INTERRUPT 0
>>>> | CANCEL 5
>>>> JOB TIME : 0.56 s
>>>>
>>>> Given the test seems to make assumptions about an environment being
>>>> setup for it I think we need some documentation somewhere about what
>>>> those pre-requisites are.
>>>
>>> I find the cancel message pretty clear, but then again it was me who
>>> wrote it...
>>>
>>> Either you point the vmlinuz parameter to some Linux kernel you built
>>> yourself, or you set it to the empty string to just use the kernel
>>> that’s part of the image. Setting Avocado parameters is done via -p,
>>> i.e. “-p key=value”. So in this case
>>> “-p vmlinuz=/path/to/linux/build/arch/x86/boot/bzImage”, or
>>> “-p vmlinuz=''”.
>>>
>>> Ideally, vmlinuz='' would be the default, but there’s a problem with
>>> that: I submitted this test along with the patches that added the
>>> required feature to the Linux kernel, so at that point that feature was
>>> not part of Linux. That’s why you generally have to point it to a Linux
>>> kernel binary you built yourself that has this feature (5.10 does).
>>
>> This is where it deviates from the rest of the check-acceptance tests.
>> Generally I don't have to worry about finding the right image myself.
>
> Yes, but there’s nothing I can do apart from just not having the test as
> part of qemu, which I don’t find better than to just cancel it when not
> run with the necessary parameters.
No I agree having the tests is useful.
>
> Or, well, I could let the test download and compile the Linux sources,
> but I don’t think that’s a viable alternative.
There has been discussion before but I agree it's not viable given the
compile times for such things.
>> At the least it would be worth pointing to a part of our docs on how
>> to build such an image.
>
> Well, I could perhaps come up with a comprehensive kernel configuration
> that works, but I really don’t think that’s valuable for people who just
> want to run the acceptance tests and don’t care about this test in
> particular. I just don’t think they’re actually going to build a Linux
> kernel just for it.
Sure - but I was trying to review the series and as part of my review I
generally like to run the things I review. Hence why I stopped as I
couldn't get things running.
> (Alternatively, I could just build a Linux kernel here on my machine,
> upload the binary and point to it somewhere, e.g. in the cancel message.
> That would be OK for me, and perhaps something I could imagine someone
> might actually use.)
I've actually done this with some Xen patches I'm working on at the
moment. I'll probably decorate the test with:
@skipUnless(os.getenv('AVOCADO_ALLOW_UNTRUSTED_CODE'), 'untrusted code')
with a comment explaining what's waiting to be upstreamed. Once there
are upstream binaries I plan on transitioning the test to those.
> I’d rather just wait until the test image contains a kernel that’s
> sufficiently new (should be the case once Fedora 34 is out), so we can
> make -p vmlinuz='' the default. Until then I personally find it
> completely reasonable to have this test just be cancelled.
>
> Max
--
Alex Bennée
- [PATCH 14/22] Acceptance Tests: introduce LinuxTest base class, (continued)
- [PATCH 14/22] Acceptance Tests: introduce LinuxTest base class, Cleber Rosa, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Cleber Rosa, 2021/02/03
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Beraldo Leal, 2021/02/04
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Alex Bennée, 2021/02/04
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Max Reitz, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Alex Bennée, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Max Reitz, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length,
Alex Bennée <=
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Max Reitz, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Alex Bennée, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2021/02/09
- Re: [PATCH 07/22] tests/acceptance/virtiofs_submounts.py: evaluate string not length, Cleber Rosa, 2021/02/15
[PATCH 18/22] Acceptance Tests: set up existing ssh keys by default, Cleber Rosa, 2021/02/03
[PATCH 15/22] Acceptance Tests: move useful ssh methods to base class, Cleber Rosa, 2021/02/03