On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 10:54:53AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 26/03/2025 10.43, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 09:00:19PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > From: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
> > >
> > > This way we can do a full boot in record-replay mode and
> > > should get a similar test coverage compared to the old
> > > replay test from tests/avocado/replay_linux.py. Thus remove
> > > the x86 avocado replay_linux test now.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > tests/avocado/replay_linux.py | 46 --------------------------
> > > tests/functional/test_x86_64_replay.py | 43 ++++++++++++++++++------
> > > 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com>
> >
> > > diff --git a/tests/functional/test_x86_64_replay.py
> > > b/tests/functional/test_x86_64_replay.py
> > > index 180f23a60c5..27287d452dc 100755
> > > --- a/tests/functional/test_x86_64_replay.py
> > > +++ b/tests/functional/test_x86_64_replay.py
> > > @@ -5,30 +5,53 @@
> > > #
> > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> > > -from qemu_test import Asset, skipFlakyTest
> > > +from subprocess import check_call, DEVNULL
> > > +
> > > +from qemu_test import Asset, skipFlakyTest, get_qemu_img
> > > from replay_kernel import ReplayKernelBase
> > > class X86Replay(ReplayKernelBase):
> > > ASSET_KERNEL = Asset(
> > > - ('https://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux'
> > > - '/releases/29/Everything/x86_64/os/images/pxeboot/vmlinuz'),
> > > -
> > > '8f237d84712b1b411baf3af2aeaaee10b9aae8e345ec265b87ab3a39639eb143')
> > > + 'https://storage.tuxboot.com/buildroot/20241119/x86_64/bzImage',
> > > +
> > > 'f57bfc6553bcd6e0a54aab86095bf642b33b5571d14e3af1731b18c87ed5aef8')
> > > +
> > > + ASSET_ROOTFS = Asset(
> > > +
> > > 'https://storage.tuxboot.com/buildroot/20241119/x86_64/rootfs.ext4.zst',
> > > +
> > > '4b8b2a99117519c5290e1202cb36eb6c7aaba92b357b5160f5970cf5fb78a751')
> >
> >
> > As a general question, I wonder if we want to add some logic to the
> > pre-cache job to clean up old cached files.
>
> Yes, I also asked myself that question already. Being a "cache", there
> should also be a way to evict old files that are not used anymore.
> Maybe we could update the timestamp of the assets each time they are used,
> and when doing "make clean", we also check the cache and delete the assets
> with timestamps older than 6 months or so?
Yeah, some time based check + "touch" would be needed, so we don't
aggressively purge files cached by a dev's use a different branch
that happens to not be checked out currently.
With 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 :|
