Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2

From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>
Cc: "Laurent Vivier" <lvivier@redhat.com>,
	"Peter Maydell" <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	"Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
	"Eduardo Habkost" <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	"Richard Henderson" <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Roman Bolshakov" <r.bolshakov@yadro.com>,
	"Claudio Fontana" <cfontana@suse.de>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v26 00/20] i386 cleanup PART 2
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 15:07:51 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YEY9x0+2KZFHrm6A@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f3700214-baed-e03a-d4e1-028758b07054@amsat.org>

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 03:57:29PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 3/8/21 2:52 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> > On 3/8/21 2:27 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> >> Hi Claudio,
> >>
> >> On 3/8/21 1:57 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> anything else for me to do here?
> >>>
> >>> The latest rebased state of this series should be always available here:
> >>>
> >>> https://gitlab.com/hw-claudio/qemu/-/tree/i386_cleanup_8
> >>>
> >>> When it comes to the ARM cleanup series,
> >>> I would like to have the tests pass for ARM, before doing even more changes, could you help me there Philippe?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe applying some of your changes on top would fix the failures? I tried, for example with the arm-cpu-features ones, but it didn't work for me..
> >>
> >> TBH I wrote these patches during my personal spare time and this
> >> became a real Pandora box that drained too much energy. I prefer
> >> to step back and focus on finishing smaller tasks before burning
> >> out. That said I appreciate your effort and am interested in
> >> following / reviewing your work.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Phil.
> >>
> > 
> > Thanks Philippe for sharing this, and I agree completely, it is very draining.
> > 
> > The effort of making tests happy that run in artificial environments in particular often feels to me
> > as too disconnected from actually ensuring that there is no real run time regression.
> > 
> > qtest_enabled() (implicitly, or explicitly via open-ended else statements) is another painful variable to keep in mind in cpu and machine code, so it is not helpful in my view.
> > 
> > I'll try to push more to get the tests running again, if you have any comment or idea, feel free to just point me in the right direction,
> > that is very valuable to me, even without working code.
> 
> Basically I gave up after realizing from Daniel reviews that we need
> QMP commands to query QEMU at runtime its built-in features, so we
> have build-agnostic tests easier to maintain. I agree this is the
> best way to resolve this particular case, but also scale for various
> other cases.

Which patch / review are you referring to here ?

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|