qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] iotests: use -ccw on s390x for


From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] iotests: use -ccw on s390x for 051
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:55:29 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0

On 08.09.2017 13:54, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 08.09.2017 um 13:24 hat Cornelia Huck geschrieben:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:04:25 +0200
>> Kevin Wolf <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 05.09.2017 um 17:16 hat Cornelia Huck geschrieben:
>>>> The default cpu model on s390x does not provide zPCI, which is
>>>> not yet wired up on tcg. Moreover, virtio-ccw is the standard
>>>> on s390x, so use the -ccw instead of the -pci versions of virtio
>>>> devices on s390x.
>>>>
>>>> Provide an output file for s390x.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <address@hidden>
>>>> ---
>>>>  tests/qemu-iotests/051                     |   9 +-
>>>>  tests/qemu-iotests/051.s390-ccw-virtio.out | 434 
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  2 files changed, 442 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>  create mode 100644 tests/qemu-iotests/051.s390-ccw-virtio.out  
>>>
>>> It's already a pain to have two separate output files for 051, let's try
>>> to avoid adding a third one. Even more so since I think that the split
>>> between 051.out and 051.pc.out was already made for s390, so I'm not
>>> sure if anyone would actually still make use of the plain 051.out
>>> output if s390 got it's own one.
>>
>> Are there no non-pc and non-s390 machines for which this is run?
> 
> Who knows? But I'm not aware of anyone who is interested in something
> else and has contributed to the test cases until now.

FWIW, as far as I know, Lukáš is running this test also on ppc64 in our
weekly regression run. So it would be good to keep that working, please :-)

>> Another approach would be to drop the -pci postfix, but I don't want to
>> introduce more usage of aliases.
> 
> Maybe that would indeed be the easiest way. As long as we don't intend
> to remove the alias from qemu, there's no reason not to use it in tests.

Maybe we should even use it in a couple of places on purpose - so we get
some test coverage for them?

 Thomas



reply via email to

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