On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 08:25:09 +0200
Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
> With some small modifications, we can also use the the netfilter,
> the fiter-mirror and the filter-redirector tests on s390x.
s/fiter/filter/
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
> ---
> tests/Makefile.include | 3 +++
> tests/test-filter-mirror.c | 9 +++++++--
> tests/test-filter-redirector.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
> tests/test-netfilter.c | 11 ++++++++++-
> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/test-filter-mirror.c b/tests/test-filter-mirror.c
> index a1d5865..d569d27 100644
> --- a/tests/test-filter-mirror.c
> +++ b/tests/test-filter-mirror.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,11 @@ static void test_mirror(void)
> char *recv_buf;
> uint32_t size = sizeof(send_buf);
> size = htonl(size);
> + const char *devstr = "e1000";
> +
> + if (g_str_equal(qtest_get_arch(), "s390x")) {
> + devstr = "virtio-net-ccw";
> + }
I'm wondering if we could unify selection of the network device
somehow. There's probably two cases:
- Test a specific device. This obviously needs to be decided
individually.
- Just use a functional network device. For s390x, this will be
virtio-net-ccw; for other architectures, this test uses e1000, while
one of the tests below uses rtl8139 (why?). A helper for that may be
useful.
>
> ret = socketpair(PF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0, send_sock);
> g_assert_cmpint(ret, !=, -1);
> diff --git a/tests/test-filter-redirector.c b/tests/test-filter-redirector.c
> index 69c663b..3afd411 100644
> --- a/tests/test-filter-redirector.c
> +++ b/tests/test-filter-redirector.c
> @@ -57,6 +57,16 @@
> #include "qemu/error-report.h"
> #include "qemu/main-loop.h"
>
> +static const char *get_devstr(void)
> +{
> + if (g_str_equal(qtest_get_arch(), "s390x")) {
> + return "virtio-net-ccw";
> + }
> +
> + return "rtl8139";
No problem with your patch, but I'm wondering why this does not use
e1000. Special capabilities of rtl8139?
> +}
> +
> +
> static void test_redirector_tx(void)
> {
> int backend_sock[2], recv_sock;
> diff --git a/tests/test-netfilter.c b/tests/test-netfilter.c
> index 8b5a9b2..2506473 100644
> --- a/tests/test-netfilter.c
> +++ b/tests/test-netfilter.c
> @@ -182,6 +182,12 @@ static void remove_netdev_with_multi_netfilter(void)
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> int ret;
> + char *args;
> + const char *devstr = "e1000";
It's our old friend again :)
> +
> + if (g_str_equal(qtest_get_arch(), "s390x")) {
> + devstr = "virtio-net-ccw";
> + }
>
> g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL);
> qtest_add_func("/netfilter/addremove_one", add_one_netfilter);
> @@ -191,10 +197,13 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> qtest_add_func("/netfilter/remove_netdev_multi",
> remove_netdev_with_multi_netfilter);
>
> - qtest_start("-netdev user,id=qtest-bn0 -device e1000,netdev=qtest-bn0");
> + args = g_strdup_printf("-netdev user,id=qtest-bn0 "
> + "-device %s,netdev=qtest-bn0", devstr);
> + qtest_start(args);
> ret = g_test_run();
>
> qtest_end();
> + g_free(args);
>
> return ret;
> }
Even though I think we should deal with the questions above, having
more tests for s390x is certainly a good idea. Thus,
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com>
