On 1/12/21 3:05 PM, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote: > Hi, > > On 1/11/21 11:07 PM, Jiaxun Yang wrote: >> Test booting of PMON bootloader on loongson3-virt platform. >> >> $ (venv) AVOCADO_ALLOW_UNTRUSTED_CODE=1 \ >> avocado --show=app,console \ >> run -t machine:loongson3-virt tests/acceptance >> Fetching asset from >> tests/acceptance/machine_mips_loongson3v.py:MipsLoongson3v.test_pmon_serial_console >> >> JOB ID : 8e202b3727847c9104d0d3d6546ed225d35f6706 >> JOB LOG : >> /home/flygoat/avocado/job-results/job-2021-01-12T10.02-8e202b3/job.log >> (1/1) >> tests/acceptance/machine_mips_loongson3v.py:MipsLoongson3v.test_pmon_serial_console: >> >> console: PMON2000 MIPS Initializing. Standby... >> console: 00000000Jump to 9fc > <snip> >> Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.y...@flygoat.com> >> --- >> MAINTAINERS | 1 + >> tests/acceptance/machine_mips_loongson3v.py | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 tests/acceptance/machine_mips_loongson3v.py > > Allow me to use this new test as an example to start a discussion about > the organization of the acceptance files. > > The mips64le tests currently are: > > $ ./venv/bin/avocado list -t arch:mips64el acceptance/ > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_mips64el_malta > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_mips64el_fuloong2e > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_mips64el_malta_5KEc_cpio > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/linux_ssh_mips_malta.py:LinuxSSH.test_mips_malta64el_kernel3_2_0 > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/machine_mips_loongson3v.py:MipsLoongson3v.test_pmon_serial_console > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/machine_mips_malta.py:MaltaMachineFramebuffer.test_mips_malta_i6400_framebuffer_logo_1core > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/machine_mips_malta.py:MaltaMachineFramebuffer.test_mips_malta_i6400_framebuffer_logo_7cores > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/machine_mips_malta.py:MaltaMachineFramebuffer.test_mips_malta_i6400_framebuffer_logo_8cores > > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/replay_kernel.py:ReplayKernelNormal.test_mips64el_malta > INSTRUMENTED > acceptance/replay_kernel.py:ReplayKernelSlow.test_mips64el_malta_5KEc_cpio > > Most of them are simple "boot linux (or firmware) and check the console" > tests. The replay_kernel.py contain tests for a given feature and happen > to be testing on mips64el as well. So on tests/acceptance directory > we've got boot tests spread across files and mixed with "generic" > feature tests. > > I think we should find a home for those boot tests. Maybe throw them all > in a sub-directory called "boot_tests", or in arch-oriented directories > (boot_tests/mips64el, boot_tests/x86_64, ...) which would make easier to > reference them in the MAINTAINERS file. > > Any thought?
[thread hijack...] A tests might be multi-arch. If you think it is easier to have the tests sorted in subfolders, go ahead :) Where is a test is not a problem. The problem we have to solve is how to relate a test with its maintainers / developers interested in it. We once said what really matters are Avocado tags. This might be an underused feature of Avocado. Maybe what we need is a script to relate test tags with MAINTAINERS? Let's say we use the 'A' tag for that: -- >8 -- diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index cb0656aec3d..a484d429d78 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -646,6 +646,7 @@ M: Anup Patel <anup.pa...@wdc.com> M: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@wdc.com> L: qemu-ri...@nongnu.org S: Maintained +A: device:goldfish_rtc F: hw/rtc/goldfish_rtc.c F: include/hw/rtc/goldfish_rtc.h @@ -1160,6 +1161,11 @@ Loongson-3 virtual platforms M: Huacai Chen <chenhua...@kernel.org> R: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.y...@flygoat.com> S: Maintained +A: machine:loongson3-virt +A: cpu:Loongson-3A1000 +A: device:liointc +A: device:goldfish_rtc F: hw/intc/loongson_liointc.c F: hw/mips/loongson3_bootp.c F: hw/mips/loongson3_bootp.h --- If this test fails, it should list the maintainers of the loongson3-virt machine and the goldfish RTC. Maintainers add their tags of interest, and can Ack when a developer add a tag to their MAINTAINERS entry. Thought? :)
