On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:53:52PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 2018-05-30 15:47, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 02:35:34PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
> >> On 2018-04-26 18:19, Roman Kagan wrote:
> >>> Some iotests assume availability of certain block drivers, and fail if
> >>> the dri
On 2018-05-30 15:47, Roman Kagan wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 02:35:34PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 2018-04-26 18:19, Roman Kagan wrote:
>>> Some iotests assume availability of certain block drivers, and fail if
>>> the driver is not supported by QEMU because it was disabled at configure
>>>
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 02:35:34PM +0200, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 2018-04-26 18:19, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > Some iotests assume availability of certain block drivers, and fail if
> > the driver is not supported by QEMU because it was disabled at configure
> > time.
> >
> > This series tries to addres
On 2018-04-26 18:19, Roman Kagan wrote:
> Some iotests assume availability of certain block drivers, and fail if
> the driver is not supported by QEMU because it was disabled at configure
> time.
>
> This series tries to address that, by making QEMU report the actual list
> of supported block driv
Hi,
This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:
Type: series
Message-id: 20180426161958.2872-1-rka...@virtuozzo.com
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/17] iotests: don't choke on disabled drivers
=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash
BASE=bas
Some iotests assume availability of certain block drivers, and fail if
the driver is not supported by QEMU because it was disabled at configure
time.
This series tries to address that, by making QEMU report the actual list
of supported block drivers in response to "-drive format=?", and using
this
