Steven Sistare <steven.sist...@oracle.com> writes:
> On 7/8/2025 6:02 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> Hi Steve,
>> On 8/7/25 19:24, Steve Sistare wrote:
>>> Add a unit test for qom-list-getv.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Steve Sistare <steven.sist...@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>> tests/qtest/qom-test.c | 64
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/qtest/qom-test.c b/tests/qtest/qom-test.c
>>> index 27d70bc..4defff1 100644
>>> --- a/tests/qtest/qom-test.c
>>> +++ b/tests/qtest/qom-test.c
>>> @@ -11,11 +11,72 @@
>>> #include "qobject/qdict.h"
>>> #include "qobject/qlist.h"
>>> +#include "qobject/qstring.h"
>>> #include "qemu/cutils.h"
>>> #include "libqtest.h"
>>> static int verbosity_level;
>>> +static void test_getv(QTestState *qts, QList *paths)
>>> +{
>>> + QListEntry *entry, *prop_entry, *path_entry;
>>> + g_autoptr(QDict) response = NULL;
>>> + QDict *args = qdict_new();
>>> + QDict *prop;
>>> + QList *return_list;
>>> +
>>> + if (verbosity_level >= 2) {
>>
>> Tested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
>>
>> But I note this doesn't assert anything except if you use V=3 and
>> look at the output.
>
> I don't follow. It unconditionally traverses the whole tree and asserts
> that properties are present. Plus, for V >= 2, it prints paths.
It starts with path "/machine".
For each property returned for that path, it checks there is a name and
type.
It collects the paths where the type starts with "child<" into a list,
and recurses. So it walks the entire tree under "/machine".
It does not examine property values at all. This is a gap in testing.
It does not check properties against expectations. The test would
silently pass if qom-list-getv always returned [], or if it always
returned crap types like "". Another gap.
Checking all this for the entire tree is entirely impractical. But we
could check it for a suitable path of our choice. I recommend to avoid
going into machine-dependent weeds there. Maybe create some suitable
thing with -object, and check that.
If you can't afford implementing this, document the gaps in a TODO
comment.
> It is patterned after test_properties() in the same file.
Same gaps :)
[...]
