On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 02:18:09PM +0400, Maria Kustova wrote:
>> + def execute(self, input_commands=None, fuzz_config=None):
>> + """ Execute a test.
>> +
>> + The method creates backing and test images, runs test app and
>> analyzes
>> + its exit status. If the application was killed by a signal, the test
>> + is marked as failed.
>> + """
>> + if input_commands is None:
>> + commands = self.commands
>> + else:
>> + commands = input_commands
>> + os.chdir(self.current_dir)
>> + backing_file_name, backing_file_fmt = self._create_backing_file()
>> + img_size = image_generator.create_image('test_image',
>> + backing_file_name,
>> + backing_file_fmt,
>> + fuzz_config)
>> + for item in commands:
>> + start = random.randint(0, img_size)
>> + end = random.randint(start, img_size)
>> + current_cmd = list(self.__dict__[item[0].replace('-', '_')])
>
> This special case for self.qemu_img and self.qemu_io is not obvious to
> me when reading the code. It would be clearer to use the same
> $qemu_img/$qemu_io substitution mechanism as for $test_img/$off/$len
> below.
Separate processing of test programs is due to the impossibility to
laconically replace a string with an unpacked list of strings.
But I agree that using of __dict__ is not safe and have to be redesigned.
BR, M.
