qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH] iotests: add test for removing persistent bitmap from backin


From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iotests: add test for removing persistent bitmap from backing file
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 14:56:03 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0

On 17.03.21 17:02, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
Just demonstrate one of x-blockdev-reopen usecases. We can't simply
remove persistent bitmap from RO node (for example from backing file),
as we need to remove it from the image too. So, we should reopen the
node first.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
---
  .../tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing          | 68 +++++++++++++++++++
  .../tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing.out      |  6 ++
  2 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
  create mode 100755 tests/qemu-iotests/tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing
  create mode 100644 tests/qemu-iotests/tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing.out

diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing 
b/tests/qemu-iotests/tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing
new file mode 100755
index 0000000000..121860d035
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/tests/remove-bitmap-from-backing
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env python3
+#
+# Test removing persistent bitmap from backing
+#
+# Copyright (c) 2021 Virtuozzo International GmbH.
+#
+# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
+# (at your option) any later version.
+#
+# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+# GNU General Public License for more details.
+#
+# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+# along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+#
+
+import iotests
+from iotests import log, qemu_img_create
+
+iotests.script_initialize(supported_fmts=['qcow2'])
+
+top, base = iotests.file_path('top', 'base')
+size = '1M'
+
+qemu_img_create('-f', iotests.imgfmt, base, size)
+qemu_img_create('-f', iotests.imgfmt, '-b', base, top, size)

I think qemu-img create nowadays complains when you use -b without -F. Also, I’d prefer an assert around this (i.e. assert qemu_img_create() == 0).

+
+iotests.qemu_img('bitmap', '--add', base ,'bitmap0')

s/ ,/, /

Which makes me notice that 297 doesn’t yet check tests/.  I’ll send a patch.

Also, again, an assert == 0 might be nice.

And then I wonder why you import qemu_img_create from iotests, but not qemu_img and qemu_img_pipe.

+# Just assert that our method of checking bitmaps in the image works.
+assert 'bitmaps' in iotests.qemu_img_pipe('info', base)
+
+vm = iotests.VM().add_drive(top, 'backing.node-name=base')
+vm.launch()
+
+log('Trying to remove persistent bitmap from r-o base node, should fail:')
+vm.qmp_log('block-dirty-bitmap-remove', node='base', name='bitmap0')
+
+new_base_opts = {
+    'node-name': 'base',
+    'driver': 'qcow2',
+    'file': {
+        'driver': 'file',
+        'filename':  base
+    },
+    'read-only': False
+}
+
+# Don't want to bother with filtering qmp_log for reopen command
+result = vm.qmp('x-blockdev-reopen', **new_base_opts)
+if result != {'return': {}}:
+    log('Failed to reopen: ' + str(result))
+
+log('Remove persistent bitmap from base node reopened to RW:')
+vm.qmp_log('block-dirty-bitmap-remove', node='base', name='bitmap0')
+
+new_base_opts['read-only'] = True
+result = vm.qmp('x-blockdev-reopen', **new_base_opts)
+if result != {'return': {}}:
+    log('Failed to reopen: ' + str(result))
+
+vm.shutdown()
+
+if 'bitmaps' in iotests.qemu_img_pipe('info', base):
+    "Hmm, bitmap is still in the base image. That's wrong"

With 297 covering tests/, it complains about this “pointless string statement”. Shouldn’t this be something like

log('ERROR: Bitmap is still in the base image')

?

Apart from that more syntax-y stuff, the test looks good to me.

Max




reply via email to

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