Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 05/11] iotests: allow resume_drive by node name

[Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3804 bytes --]

On 14.01.19 17:06, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 14.01.2019 17:46, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 29.12.18 13:20, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> After node graph changes, we may not be able to resume_drive by device
>>> name (backing files are not recursively searched). So, lets allow to
>>> resume by node-name. Set constant name for breakpoints, to avoid
>>> introducing extra parameters.
>>
>> Hm, I don't quite understand this reason.  Is this so you can create
>> breakpoints on one node (which falls through to the first blkdebug node)
>> and then remove them from another (falling through to the same blkdebug
>> node)?
> 
> add/remove breakpoint goes through ->file children, but my filter links
> active disk as ->backing. So, before block-job start we can insert breakpoint
> by device name. But then, when filter inserted, we can't remove breakpoint,
> because my filter hides blkdebug with active disk under ->backing link.
> 
> Maybe, right solution would be support backing links in bdrv_debug_breakpoint()
> and bdrv_debug_remove_breakpoint() for the case when there is no file child.
> 
> But being unsure about right behavior, I've decided to adjust the test.
> 
> What about just do both  add/remove breakpoint through blkdebug node-name, to
> make it less weird?

Yes, I was mostly wondering about the "set constant name for
breakpoints".  It doesn't seem necessary to me; if you use node names,
you could address the blkdebug node directly, I would think.

Max

>> Wouldn't it be better to let the user specify the breakpoint name?
> 
> it's not needed now. with current naming we can have one break-point in device,
> so we don't need different names.
> 
>>
>> Max
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
>>> ---
>>>   tests/qemu-iotests/iotests.py | 9 +++++----
>>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/iotests.py b/tests/qemu-iotests/iotests.py
>>> index 76877ad584..c9779f432f 100644
>>> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/iotests.py
>>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/iotests.py
>>> @@ -415,11 +415,11 @@ class VM(qtest.QEMUQtestMachine):
>>>               self.pause_drive(drive, "write_aio")
>>>               return
>>>           self.qmp('human-monitor-command',
>>> -                    command_line='qemu-io %s "break %s bp_%s"' % (drive, event, drive))
>>> +                    command_line='qemu-io %s "break %s bp_0"' % (drive, event))
>>>   
>>>       def resume_drive(self, drive):
>>>           self.qmp('human-monitor-command',
>>> -                    command_line='qemu-io %s "remove_break bp_%s"' % (drive, drive))
>>> +                    command_line='qemu-io %s "remove_break bp_0"' % (drive))
>>>   
>>>       def hmp_qemu_io(self, drive, cmd):
>>>           '''Write to a given drive using an HMP command'''
>>> @@ -543,13 +543,14 @@ class QMPTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
>>>           self.assertEqual(self.vm.flatten_qmp_object(json.loads(json_filename[5:])),
>>>                            self.vm.flatten_qmp_object(reference))
>>>   
>>> -    def cancel_and_wait(self, drive='drive0', force=False, resume=False):
>>> +    def cancel_and_wait(self, drive='drive0', force=False, resume=False,
>>> +                        resume_node=None):
>>>           '''Cancel a block job and wait for it to finish, returning the event'''
>>>           result = self.vm.qmp('block-job-cancel', device=drive, force=force)
>>>           self.assert_qmp(result, 'return', {})
>>>   
>>>           if resume:
>>> -            self.vm.resume_drive(drive)
>>> +            self.vm.resume_drive(resume_node or drive)
>>>   
>>>           cancelled = False
>>>           result = None
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]