On 2021/11/17 16:08, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Hi Yanan,
On 11/17/21 08:37, wangyanan (Y) wrote:
On 2021/11/15 22:58, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Keep the common TYPE_MACHINE class initialization in
machine_base_class_init(), make it abstract, and move
the non-common code to a new class: "smp-without-dies-valid".
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com>
---
tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c b/tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c
index dfe7f1313b0..90a249fe8c8 100644
--- a/tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c
+++ b/tests/unit/test-smp-parse.c
@@ -478,13 +478,19 @@ static void machine_base_class_init(ObjectClass
*oc, void *data)
{
MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_CLASS(oc);
+ mc->smp_props.prefer_sockets = true;
+
+ mc->name = g_strdup(SMP_MACHINE_NAME);
+}
+
+static void machine_without_dies_valid_class_init(ObjectClass *oc,
void *data)
+{
+ MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_CLASS(oc);
+
mc->min_cpus = MIN_CPUS;
mc->max_cpus = MAX_CPUS;
- mc->smp_props.prefer_sockets = true;
mc->smp_props.dies_supported = false;
-
- mc->name = g_strdup(SMP_MACHINE_NAME);
}
static void machine_without_dies_invalid_class_init(ObjectClass
*oc, void *data)
@@ -606,9 +612,14 @@ static const TypeInfo smp_machine_types[] = {
{
.name = TYPE_MACHINE,
.parent = TYPE_OBJECT,
+ .abstract = true,
.class_init = machine_base_class_init,
.class_size = sizeof(MachineClass),
.instance_size = sizeof(MachineState),
+ }, {
+ .name = MACHINE_TYPE_NAME("smp-without-dies-valid"),
+ .parent = TYPE_MACHINE,
+ .class_init = machine_without_dies_valid_class_init,
}, {
.name =
MACHINE_TYPE_NAME("smp-without-dies-invalid"),
.parent = TYPE_MACHINE,
@@ -629,7 +640,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL);
g_test_add_data_func("/test-smp-parse/generic/valid",
- TYPE_MACHINE,
+ MACHINE_TYPE_NAME("smp-without-dies-valid"),
test_generic_valid);
g_test_add_data_func("/test-smp-parse/generic/invalid",
MACHINE_TYPE_NAME("smp-without-dies-invalid"),
After patch #7 and #8, we will have sub-tests as below. It looks nice,
but it will
probably be better to tweak "smp-without-dies-valid" to
"smp-generic-valid",
and "smp-without-dies-invalid" to "smp-generic-invalid", which will be more
consistent with the corresponding sub-test name.
It's Ok now as we only have dies currently besides generic
sockets/cores/threads,
but "smp-without-dies-xxx" will become a bit confusing when new topology
members are introduced and tested here.
OK I modified it and will respin once v6.2 is released.
Also test_with_dies() should be split in 2 tests: valid/invalid;
then smp_parse_test() should split tests further regarding the
socket preference. But I'll let that to you,
Sure, I can do this in an appropriate time. But IMHO, I don't see a
strong necessity to split test_with_dies for now, as the valid/invalid
scenarios share the same class properties. We can probably keep it
as is until we have to split it.
As for socket preference, I can foresee code duplication if we split
all the tests into two parts just regarding the socket preference.
Isn't it clear enough to use current smp_parse_test() for each
test data sample? Do we have other concern here?
I wanted to 1/ fix
our Windows CI and 2/ show you how to structure the tests.
Understood. The test architecture is indeed improved a lot.
Thanks for your education. 😉
Thanks,
Yanan
Regards,
Phil.
.
