[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] qemu-test: a set of tests scripts for QEMU

From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [ANNOUNCE] qemu-test: a set of tests scripts for QEMU
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:44:07 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110922 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.15

On 12/28/2011 09:28 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/28/2011 05:01 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
I'd say that running a ping test is a weak version of kvm-autotest's
system tests.  Running a synthetic test that pokes values into memory
and mmio and sees a packet coming out is a unit test (the latter can in
fact be executed without a guest at all, just a table driving calls to
the memory and irq APIs).


(found by looking for 'fix' in the commit log and filtering out the
commits that don't support my case)

how can you reject such patches on the grounds that they're not
accompanied by unit tests?

That's why I've also proposed qtest. But having written quite a few qtest unit tests by now, you hit the limits of this type of testing pretty quickly.

only by making it easy to add tests for
them.  I think it would be hard/impossible to test them with
linux-as-a-guest, since they fix edge cases that linux doesn't invoke.
But by having our own driver (often just using qmp to poke at memory),
we can easily generate the sequence that triggers the error.

We'd probably need a library to support setting up a pci device's BARs,
but that's easy with qmp/python integration.  You can even poke a small
executable into memory and execute it directly, if you really need guest
cpu interaction.

Please review the qtest series. I think it offers a pretty good approach to writing this style of test. But as I mentioned, you hit the limits pretty quickly.


Anthony Liguori

reply via email to

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