On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 01:20:05PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> writes: > > > When reviewing tracetool patches it is often very unclear what the > > expected output will be for the generated backends. Compounding > > this is that a default build will only enable the 'log' trace > > backend, so developers won't see generated code for other backends > > without making a special effort. Some backends are also platform > > specific, so can't be enabled in QEMU builds, even though tracetool > > could generate the code. > > > > To address this, introduce a test suite for tracetool which is > > conceptually similar to the qapi-schema test. It is a simple > > python program that runs tracetool and compares the actual output > > to historical reference output kept in git. The test directly > > emits TAP format logs for ease of integration with meson. > > > > This can be run with > > > > make check-tracetool > > > > to make it easier for developers changing generated output, the > > sample expected content can be auto-recreated > > > > QEMU_TEST_REGENERATE=1 make check-tracetool > > make check-qapi-schema uses QAPI_TEST_UPDATE for this. Should we use a > single environment variable for this purpose? I'd be fine with changing > QAPI_TEST_UPDATE.
Oh yes, that env was my doing too. Using a common env name for any test suite makes sense. 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 :|
