On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:40:51PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 17 October 2018 at 18:38, Cleber Rosa <cr...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 10/17/18 12:29 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 01:34:41PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > >>> So, why does the test code need to care? It's not clear > >>> from the patch... My expectation would be that you'd > >>> just test all the testable target architectures, > >>> regardless of what the host architecture is. > >> > >> I tend to agree. Maybe the right solution is to get rid of the > >> os.uname(). I think the default should be testing all QEMU > >> binaries that were built, and the host architecture shouldn't > >> matter. > > Yes, looking at os.uname() also seems like an odd thing > for the tests to be doing here. The test framework > should be as far as possible host-architecture agnostic. > (For some of the KVM cases there probably is a need to > care, but those are exceptions, not the rule.) > > > I'm in favor of exercising all built targets, but that seems to me to be > > on another layer, above the test themselves. This change is about the > > behavior of a test when not told about the target arch (and thus binary) > > it should use. > > At that level, I think the right answer is "tell the user > they need to specify the qemu executable they are trying to test". > In particular, there is no guarantee that the user has actually > built the executable for the target that corresponds to the > host, so it doesn't work to try to default to that anyway.
Agreed. However, I don't see when exactly this message would be triggered. Cleber, on which use cases do you expect pick_default_qemu_bin() to be called? In an ideal world, any testing runner/tool should be able to automatically test all binaries by default. Can Avocado help us do that? (If not, we could just do it inside a ./tests/acceptance/run script). -- Eduardo
