On 2023-04-20 10:12:37, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 20/04/2023 09.57, Philippe Mathieu-Daud wrote: > > Hi Kautuk, > > > > On 19/4/23 11:22, Kautuk Consul wrote: > > > Commit c0c8687ef0fd990db8db1655a8a6c5a5e35dd4bb disabled the > > > boot_linux.py test-case due to which the code coverage for ppc > > > decreased by around 2%. As per the discussion on > > > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/87sfdpqcy4....@linaro.org/ it > > > was mentioned that the baseline test for ppc64 could be modified > > > to make up this 2% code coverage. This patch attempts to achieve > > > this 2% code coverage by adding various device command line > > > arguments (to ./qemu-system-ppc64) in the tuxrun_baselines.py > > > test-case. > > > > > > The code coverage report with boot_linux.py, without it and finally > > > with these tuxrun_baselines.py changes is as follows: > > > > > > With boot_linux.py > > > ------------------ > > > ߦߦ lines......: 13.8% (58006 of 420997 lines) > > > ߦߦ functions..: 20.7% (7675 of 36993 functions) > > > ߦߦ branches...: 9.2% (22146 of 240611 branches) > > > Without boot_linux.py (without this patch changes) > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ߦߦ lines......: 11.9% (50174 of 420997 lines) > > > ߦߦ functions..: 18.8% (6947 of 36993 functions) > > > ߦߦ branches...: 7.4% (17580 of 239017 branches) > > > Without boot_linux.py (with this patch changes) > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > ߦߦ lines......: 13.8% (58287 of 420997 lines) > > > ߦߦ functions..: 20.7% (7640 of 36993 functions) > > > ߦߦ branches...: 8.4% (20223 of 240611 branches) > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kautuk Consul <kcon...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > Reported-by: Alex Benne <alex.ben...@linaro.org> > > > --- > > > ߦ tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > ߦ 1 file changed, 122 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py > > > b/tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py > > > index d343376faa..f763ee5d50 100644 > > > --- a/tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py > > > +++ b/tests/avocado/tuxrun_baselines.py > > > @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ > > > ߦ import os > > > ߦ import time > > > +import string > > > +import random > > > ߦ from avocado import skip, skipIf > > > ߦ from avocado_qemu import QemuSystemTest > > > @@ -308,7 +310,7 @@ def test_ppc64(self): > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ """ > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=arch:ppc64 > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=machine:pseries > > > -ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=cpu:POWER8 > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=cpu:POWER10 > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=endian:big > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=console:hvc0 > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=tuxboot:ppc64 > > > @@ -316,21 +318,139 @@ def test_ppc64(self): > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=extradev:driver=spapr-vscsi > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ :avocado: tags=root:sda > > > ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ """ > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ # Generate a random string > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ res = ''.join(random.choices(string.ascii_lowercase + > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ string.digits, k=8)) > > > + > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ # create qcow2 image to be used later. > > > +ߦߦߦߦߦߦߦ process.run('./qemu-img create -f qcow2 ' > > > > Please take qemu-img from $PATH. > > I think it would even be better to provide a function in the base class to > call qemu-img ... we already have some code in > tests/avocado/avocado_qemu/__init__.py to find a usable qemu-img binary, I > think that could be extended?
Thanks everybody for the comments. I have extended the __init__.py source code to introduce a new function that finds the qemu-img binary. This function is now getting called from tuxrun_baselines.py in the v3 patchset I just sent. I haven't created a function that actually executes qemu-img as there didn't seem adequate reason to do so. > > Thomas >