On 11/09/2019 10.54, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 11.09.2019 um 10:01 hat Thomas Huth geschrieben:
>> On 11/09/2019 08.58, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Am 10.09.2019 um 21:07 hat Eric Blake geschrieben:
>>>> On 9/10/19 1:58 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>>>> Our "tests" directory is very overcrowded - we store the qtests,
>>>>> unit test and other files there. That makes it difficult to
>>>>> determine which file belongs to each test subsystem, and the
>>>>> wildcards in the MAINTAINERS file are inaccurate, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's clean up this mess. The first patches disentangle some
>>>>> dependencies, and the last three patches then move the qtests
>>>>> and libqos (which is a subsystem of the qtests) to a new folder
>>>>> called "tests/qtest/".
>>>>
>>>> I'd also welcome a rename of tests/qemu-iotests to tests/iotests.
>>>
>>> I might prefer if the directory were named "iotests" rather than
>>> "qemu-iotests" if we were only adding the code now.
>>>
>>> However, I'm not so sure if I'd like a rename now because a rename
>>> always comes with a cost and the benefits are rather limited in this
>>> case.
>>
>> Well, if we all agree that it rather should be renamed, we should maybe
>> rather do it now than later. Later the cost might even be higher.
> 
> What I'm saying is that I'm not sure that it should be renamed. What
> will we gain from the rename apart from saving five redundant characters
> in the path?

Since the iotests are currently creating unix sockets in the
tests/qemu-iotests/ directory, and the total length of the directory
here is limited, it indeed makes a small difference. But well, that
likely should be fixed instead by moving the sockets to /tmp/ instead.

 Thomas