From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59548) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnBf7-0007XL-N2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 18:40:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dnBf6-0006So-Tp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 18:40:41 -0400 References: <1646044f-3c57-c415-f261-463c74ea45b8@redhat.com> <2690a268-b5be-7974-e8ef-c5a2f09c72a5@redhat.com> From: John Snow Message-ID: <494b96d5-d2a2-957e-3169-7fb2461b59de@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 18:40:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/5] qemu-iotests: make python tests attempt to leave intermediate files List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake , Jeff Cody , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: stefanha@redhat.com, kwolf@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org On 08/30/2017 06:35 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 08/30/2017 05:28 PM, John Snow wrote: > >> I'm a little iffy on this patch; I know that ./check can take care of >> our temp files for us now, but because each python test is itself a >> little mini-harness, I'm a little leery of moving the teardown to setup >> and trying to pre-clean the confetti before the test begins. >> >> What's the benefit? We still have to clean up these files per-test, but >> now it's slightly more error-prone and in a weird place. >> >> If we want to try to preserve the most-recent-failure-files, perhaps we >> can define a setting in the python test-runner that allows us to >> globally skip file cleanup. > > On the other hand, since each test is a mini-harness, globally skipping > cleanup will make a two-part test fail on the second because of garbage > left behind by the first. > subtext was to have per-subtest files. > Patch 5 adds a comment with another possible solution: teach the python > mini-harness to either clean all files in the directory, or to relocate > the directory according to test name, so that each mini-test starts with > a fresh location, and cleanup is then handled by the harness rather than > spaghetti pre-cleanup. But any solution is better than our current > situation of nothing, so that's why I'm still okay with this patch as-is > as offering more (even if not perfect) than before. > I guess where I am unsure is really if this is better than what we currently do, which is to (try) to clean up after each test as best as we can. I don't see it as too different from trying to clean up before each test. It does give us the ability to leave behind a little detritus after a failed run, but it's so imperfect that I wonder if it's worth shifting this code around to change not much. I won't die on this hill, it just strikes me a slightly less intuitive use of the python unittest framework. --js