Re: [PATCH 2/6] tests/qtest: Add qtest_probe_accel() method

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 09:16:01AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 12/03/2021 00.11, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > Introduce the qtest_probe_accel() method which allows
> > to query at runtime if a QEMU instance has an accelerator
> > built-in.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >   tests/qtest/libqos/libqtest.h |  9 +++++++++
> >   tests/qtest/libqtest.c        | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/qtest/libqos/libqtest.h b/tests/qtest/libqos/libqtest.h
> > index a68dcd79d44..ebedb82ec98 100644
> > --- a/tests/qtest/libqos/libqtest.h
> > +++ b/tests/qtest/libqos/libqtest.h
> > @@ -763,6 +763,15 @@ void qmp_expect_error_and_unref(QDict *rsp, const char 
> > *class);
> >    */
> >   bool qtest_probe_child(QTestState *s);
> > +/**
> > + * qtest_probe_accel:
> > + * @s: QTestState instance to operate on.
> > + * @name: Accelerator name to check for.
> > + *
> > + * Returns: true if the accelerator is built in.
> > + */
> > +bool qtest_probe_accel(QTestState *s, const char *name);
> 
> Maybe better qtest_has_accel() ? ... that makes it clear right from the
> start what the return type is about.

It looks like qtest_probe_accel() is getting used in contexts in the
following patches that would be better suited with an "enabled" API

 qtest_accel_enabled(s, accel_name)

So, I think we should create that interface. Do we also need a
qtest_has_accel()? Does it matter which ones have been compiled
in when they're not active?

(Hmm, 'active' might be a better verb yet. qtest_accel_active() ?)

Thanks,
drew