Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [RFC PATCH] tests: Add a device_add/del HMP test

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:13:21AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 09.09.2017 22:41, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 08:59:32AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> Thomas Huth <address@hidden> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 05.09.2017 18:48, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> >>>> * Markus Armbruster (address@hidden) wrote:
> >>>>> Thomas Huth <address@hidden> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> People tend to forget to mark internal devices with "user_creatable = 
> >>>>>> false
> >>>>>> or hotpluggable = false, and these devices can crash QEMU if added via 
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> HMP monitor. So let's add a test to run through all devices and that 
> >>>>>> tries
> >>>>>> to add them blindly (without arguments) to see whether this could 
> >>>>>> crash the
> >>>>>> QEMU instance.
> [...]
> >>>>> * The device supports only cold plug with -device, not hot plug with
> >>>>>   device_add.
> >>>
> >>> We've got Eduardo's scripts/device-crash-test script for that already,
> >>> so no need to cover that here.
> >>
> >> Point taken.  So this test is really about hot plug / unplug.  Suggest
> >> to clarify the commit message: s/add them blindly/hotplug and unplug
> >> them blindly/.
> > 
> > We could extend device-crash-test to test device_add too, as it
> > already has extra code to deal with known crashes and testing
> > multiple machine-types.  Also, any additional code we write to
> > ensure we add mandatory arguments or plug only to valid buses
> > would apply to both -device and device_add.  I also think Python
> > test code is easier to maintain and extend, but that's just my
> > personal preference.
> 
> Adding device_add/del support to device-crash-test is certainly an
> option. The problem is that nobody runs it by default, so this won't
> help to avoid that new problems are being committed to the repository.
> 
> I think we really should have a test for "make check", too. So would my
> test be acceptable if I'd rewrite it to use QMP instead (I don't think I
> could do the full list that Markus mentioned, but at least a basic test
> via QMP as a start)?

We can run device-crash-test on "make check", we just need to
choose what's the subset of tests we want to run (because testing
all machine+device+target combinations would take too long).

But while device-crash-test doesn't support hotplug, I think your
test code would be good too.

-- 
Eduardo