Perhaps I'd suggest to add a comment to mocked TryUpdateLocks so that
UpdateLocksWaiting relies on it always succeeding (if somebody touches that
part in the future). Other than that LGTM, no need to resend.

+1 for ' so called "unit tests"'


On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:20 AM, 'Klaus Aehlig' via ganeti-devel <
[email protected]> wrote:

> ...and implement so in the most trivial way, always suceeding
> immediately. The point is, these mocks are not used to test
> the mcpu that uses the WConfD client but, instead, indirectly
> in our so called "unit tests" for the logical units that call
> the real mpcu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Klaus Aehlig <[email protected]>
> ---
>  test/py/cmdlib/testsupport/wconfd_mock.py | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/test/py/cmdlib/testsupport/wconfd_mock.py
> b/test/py/cmdlib/testsupport/wconfd_mock.py
> index 6823083..b19b336 100644
> --- a/test/py/cmdlib/testsupport/wconfd_mock.py
> +++ b/test/py/cmdlib/testsupport/wconfd_mock.py
> @@ -38,6 +38,14 @@ class MockClient(object):
>          self.wconfdmock.mylocks[lockrq[0]] = lockrq[1]
>      return []
>
> +  def UpdateLocksWaiting(self, cid, _prio, req):
> +    # as our mock TryUpdateLocks always suceeds, we can
> +    # just use it
> +    return self.TryUpdateLocks(cid, req)
> +
> +  def HasPendingRequest(self, _cid):
> +    return False
> +
>    def ListLocks(self, *_):
>      result = []
>      for lock in self.wconfdmock.mylocks:
> --
> 1.9.1.423.g4596e3a
>
>

Reply via email to