Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 8/9] tests: add qmp/qom-set-without-value test

[Thomas Huth]

On 2018-08-31 14:04, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Thomas Huth <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> From: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
>>
>> test_qom_set_without_value() is about a bug in infrastructure used by
>> the QMP core, fixed in commit c489780203.  We covered the bug in
>> infrastructure unit tests (commit bce3035a44).  I wrote that test
>> earlier, to cover QMP level as well, the test could go into qmp-test.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
>> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  tests/qmp-test.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/qmp-test.c b/tests/qmp-test.c
>> index b347228..2b923f0 100644
>> --- a/tests/qmp-test.c
>> +++ b/tests/qmp-test.c
>> @@ -321,6 +321,19 @@ static void test_qmp_preconfig(void)
>>      qtest_quit(qs);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void test_qom_set_without_value(void)
>> +{
>> +    QTestState *qts;
>> +    QDict *resp;
>> +
>> +    qts = qtest_init(common_args);
>> +    resp = qtest_qmp(qts, "{'execute': 'qom-set', 'arguments':"
>> +                     " { 'path': '/machine', 'property': 'rtc-time' } }");
>> +    g_assert_nonnull(resp);
>> +    qmp_assert_error_class(resp, "GenericError");
>> +    qtest_quit(qts);
>> +}
>> +
>>  int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>>  {
>>      g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL);
>> @@ -328,6 +341,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>>      qtest_add_func("qmp/protocol", test_qmp_protocol);
>>      qtest_add_func("qmp/oob", test_qmp_oob);
>>      qtest_add_func("qmp/preconfig", test_qmp_preconfig);
>> +    qtest_add_func("qmp/qom-set-without-value", test_qom_set_without_value);
>>  
>>      return g_test_run();
>>  }
> 
> I'm afraid you missed my objection to naming:
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-08/msg06368.html

Sorry about that, I was not on CC: for that series. I used the patches
from v5 where Marc-André put me on CC:.

> If you could work that into PULL v2, I'd be obliged.  If not, I'll have
> to address it in a follow-up patch.

IMHO the naming is not that bad ... OTOH, I think Peter might already be
away? ... so we've got plenty of time to sort this out anyway.
Marc-André, could you send a new version of the patch?

 Thomas