Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> writes:
> Pavel Dovgalyuk <pavel.dovga...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> This patch adds a test for record/replay an execution of x86_64 machine.
>> Execution scenario includes simple kernel boot, which allows testing
>> basic hardware interaction in RR mode.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Dovgalyuk <pavel.dovga...@ispras.ru>
>> ---
>> 0 files changed
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/acceptance/replay_kernel.py
>> b/tests/acceptance/replay_kernel.py
>> index b8b277ad2f..c7526f1aba 100644
>> --- a/tests/acceptance/replay_kernel.py
>> +++ b/tests/acceptance/replay_kernel.py
>> @@ -55,3 +55,19 @@ class ReplayKernel(LinuxKernelUtils):
>> True, shift, args)
>> self.run_vm(kernel_path, kernel_command_line, console_pattern,
>> False, shift, args)
>> +
>> + def test_x86_64_pc(self):
>> + """
>> + :avocado: tags=arch:x86_64
>> + :avocado: tags=machine:pc
>> + """
>> + kernel_url =
>> ('https://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora'
>> +
>> '/linux/releases/29/Everything/x86_64/os/images/pxeboot'
>> + '/vmlinuz')
>> + kernel_hash = '23bebd2680757891cf7adedb033532163a792495'
>> + kernel_path = self.fetch_asset(kernel_url, asset_hash=kernel_hash)
>> +
>> + kernel_command_line = self.KERNEL_COMMON_COMMAND_LINE +
>> 'console=ttyS0'
>
> I note that:
>
> KERNEL_COMMON_COMMAND_LINE = 'printk.time=0 '
>
> and given we are looking for repeatability here maybe we should use our
> own command line so we can compare the recorded and replayed boot?
To build on that I think a command line like:
KERNEL_COMMON_COMMAND_LINE = 'printk.time=1 panic=-1 '
called with --no-reboot and a pattern:
console_pattern = 'VFS: Cannot open root device'
You will run more of the kernel (importantly with timestamps > 0.000) so
we can have a better compare between the recorded and replayed run.
--
Alex Bennée
