From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37308) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1grgsj-0003oM-Bc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 05:26:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1grgsi-0002eO-Av for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 05:26:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:25:54 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20190207112554.6368595d.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <12a1b55d-bb0b-8a5d-20ba-9777172144c3@redhat.com> References: <20190202005610.24048-1-crosa@redhat.com> <20190202005610.24048-3-crosa@redhat.com> <20190206153639.61a5411c.cohuck@redhat.com> <85b0f519-38d8-cf7d-a22a-537dab8470a7@redhat.com> <20190206182043.49a18542.cohuck@redhat.com> <12a1b55d-bb0b-8a5d-20ba-9777172144c3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 02/20] Acceptance tests: show avocado test execution by default List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cleber Rosa Cc: Fam Zheng , Eduardo Habkost , Aleksandar Rikalo , Alex =?UTF-8?B?QmVubsOpZQ==?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Stefan Markovic , qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Aleksandar Markovic , Caio Carrara , Philippe =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldS1EYXVkw6k=?= , Aurelien Jarno On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:36:23 -0500 Cleber Rosa wrote: > On 2/6/19 12:20 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > So, to summarize: > > - add 'make check-acceptance-quick' that excludes tests marked as 'slow' > > Yes... with one caveat: since the default is to have functional tests > that are not necessarily quick, the other approach has been used. Tests > that are known to be quick are currently marked as such. > > Anyway, this task is being tracked here: > > https://trello.com/c/9HZWfKeE/79-add-a-make-check-acceptance-quick-target Yes, that sounds good as well. > > > - use the avocado command line interface to further narrow down > > architectures and machines, if wanted > > ? > > > > Yes. Do you think this deserves a section in the docs? I know that I'll find myself searching the docs for that info at some point in the future, so yes :)