Re: [PATCH 4/5] iotests: Skip "make check-block" if QEMU does not support virtio-blk

[Kevin Wolf]

Am 14.10.2019 um 13:27 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
> On 14/10/2019 13.21, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 11.10.2019 um 16:50 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
> >> The next patch is going to add some python-based tests to the "auto"
> >> group, and these tests require virtio-blk to work properly. Running
> >> iotests without virtio-blk likely does not make too much sense anyway,
> >> so instead of adding a check for the availability of virtio-blk to each
> >> and every test (which does not sound very appealing), let's rather add
> >> a check for this at the top level in the check-block.sh script instead
> >> (so that it is possible to run "make check" without the "check-block"
> >> part for qemu-system-tricore for example).
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
> >> ---
> >>  tests/check-block.sh | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> >>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/check-block.sh b/tests/check-block.sh
> >> index 679aedec50..7582347ec2 100755
> >> --- a/tests/check-block.sh
> >> +++ b/tests/check-block.sh
> >> @@ -26,10 +26,24 @@ if grep -q "CFLAGS.*-fsanitize" config-host.mak 
> >> 2>/dev/null ; then
> >>      exit 0
> >>  fi
> >>  
> >> -if [ -z "$(find . -name 'qemu-system-*' -print)" ]; then
> >> +if [ -n "$QEMU_PROG" ]; then
> >> +    qemu_prog="$QEMU_PROG"
> >> +else
> >> +    for binary in *-softmmu/qemu-system-* ; do
> >> +        if [ -x "$binary" ]; then
> >> +            qemu_prog="$binary"
> >> +            break
> >> +        fi
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better to check the availability of virtio-blk here, so
> > that if the current binary doesn't support it, we keep searching and
> > maybe pick up a different binary that supports it?
> 
> That's a good idea, indeed, but then I also need to adjust the code in
> the "check" script accordingly.

I see. If this just copies the logic that qemu-iotests already uses, I
think I would be okay with taking it as is for now.

> > Or actually, should we work with a whitelist?
> 
> I don't think that a hard-coded list will work well: Since we introduced
> the Kconfig build system, it's now possible for example to also build an
> qemu-system-aarch64 binary that does not contain any of the boards that
> support virtio. So while virtio-blk is available by default in
> qemu-system-aarch64, some builds might not contain it.

Hm, good point. I'm just worried that the default config will end up
running the tests on a machine type where it works, but if you use the
wrong set of configure options, you end up with a setup where 'make
check' fails because it uses a machine type that the iotests don't
support.

Kevin