Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: > On 09/04/2019 10.35, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> On 09/04/2019 09.45, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> We'd like to get rid of global_qtest in the long run (since it is >>>>> causing trouble for tests that run multiple instances of QEMU in >>>>> parallel, e.g. migration tests)... so if it is feasible, please don't >>>>> use it in new code anymore. Try to use a local variable in the function >>>>> that call qtest_initf() and pass the test state around via a parameter >>>>> to the functions that need it. >>>> >>>> Twenty tests still use @global_qtest >>>> >>>> Either we're serious about getting rid of @global_qtest. Then we should >>>> just do it. >>> >>> Ha ha, "just do it" ... that's quite a bit of work, actually. It's not >>> just about grep'ing for global_qtest, you also have to replace all the >>> writel(), readl() etc. functions with qtest_writel(), qtest_readl() etc. >> >> And that's precisely why I'm reluctant to demand this work from >> contributors. Asking nicely is of course fair. > > That's what I did, didn't I? I said "... so if it is feasible, please > don't use it in new code anymore". I did not say "you must not use this > in new code anymore". So where's your problem here, Markus?
You did, I don't have a problem, I just wanted to make quite sure your asking nicely wasn't misunderstood as a polite way to demand. [...]
