qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/7] Acceptance Tests: add variants definition f


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/7] Acceptance Tests: add variants definition for architectures
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 18:24:15 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0

Hi Cleber,

On 04/10/2018 17:14, Cleber Rosa wrote:
> One of the Avocado features relevant to virtualization testing is the
> ability to reuse tests in different scenarios, known as variants.
> This adds a JSON based variants file, that can be used to run most
> tests in a number of different architectures.  It can be run with:
> 
>    $ avocado run \
>      --json-variants-load=tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json \
>      --filter-by-tags='-x86_64' -- tests/acceptance/
> 
> Currently this covers 5 architectures, resulting in the execution
> of 25 different combinations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cleber Rosa <address@hidden>
> ---
>  tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>  create mode 100644 tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json
> 
> diff --git a/tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json 
> b/tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..a7a2570553
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/acceptance/variants/arch.json
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +[{"paths":["/run/*"],"variant":[["/run/aarch64",[["/run/aarch64", "arch", 
> "aarch64"]]]],"variant_id": 
> "aarch64"},{"paths":["/run/*"],"variant":[["/run/ppc",[["/run/ppc", "arch", 
> "ppc"]]]],"variant_id": 
> "ppc"},{"paths":["/run/*"],"variant":[["/run/ppc64",[["/run/ppc64", "arch", 
> "ppc64"]]]],"variant_id": 
> "ppc64"},{"paths":["/run/*"],"variant":[["/run/s390x",[["/run/s390x", "arch", 
> "s390x"]]]],"variant_id": 
> "s390x"},{"paths":["/run/*"],"variant":[["/run/x86_64",[["/run/x86_64", 
> "arch", "x86_64"]]]],"variant_id": "x86_64"}]
> 

Is this generated? (thinking about the other archs supported).

You should use some linter ;)



reply via email to

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