Re: [PATCH 2/6] tests/9pfs: Twalk with nwname=0

[Christian Schoenebeck]

On Freitag, 11. März 2022 12:41:32 CET Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 09:57:25 +0100
> 
> Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com> wrote:
> > On Mittwoch, 9. März 2022 14:24:24 CET Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> > > Send Twalk request with nwname=0. In this case no QIDs should
> > > be returned by 9p server; this is equivalent to walking to dot.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > >  tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > > index 22bdd74bc1..6c00da03f4 100644
> > > --- a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > > +++ b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > > @@ -1002,6 +1002,27 @@ static void fs_walk_nonexistent(void *obj, void
> > > *data, QGuestAllocator *t_alloc) do_walk_expect_error(v9p,
> > > "non-existent",
> > > ENOENT);
> > > 
> > >  }
> > > 
> > > +static void fs_walk_none(void *obj, void *data, QGuestAllocator
> > > *t_alloc)
> > > +{
> > 
> > Or maybe calling this function fs_walk_clone_fid and the test case name
> > "synth/walk/clone_fid" respectively instead?
> 
> I agree that Twalk with nwname=0 does clone the fid in practice but
> the test doesn't explicitly check that. In its present form, I'd
> suggest a "no_names" wording but it is already fine as is, so:

It actually does; not with this patch 2 yet, but with patch 3 (which compares 
QIDs).

> Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>

Thanks!

Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck