On Mon, 11/23 10:29, tu bo wrote: > Hi Max: > > On 11/21/2015 12:17 AM, Max Reitz wrote: > >On 20.11.2015 10:35, Fam Zheng wrote: > >>Otherwise, a window flashes on my desktop (built with SDL). Other > >>iotest cases have that. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <f...@redhat.com> > >>--- > >> tests/qemu-iotests/120 | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/120 b/tests/qemu-iotests/120 > >>index 9f13078..d899a3f 100755 > >>--- a/tests/qemu-iotests/120 > >>+++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/120 > >>@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ echo "{'execute': 'qmp_capabilities'} > >> {'execute': 'human-monitor-command', > >> 'arguments': {'command-line': 'qemu-io drv \"write -P 42 0 64k\"'}} > >> {'execute': 'quit'}" \ > >>- | $QEMU -qmp stdio -nodefaults \ > >>+ | $QEMU -qmp stdio -nographic -nodefaults \ > >> -drive > >> id=drv,if=none,file="$TEST_IMG",driver=raw,file.driver=$IMGFMT \ > >> | _filter_qmp | _filter_qemu_io > >> $QEMU_IO -c 'read -P 42 0 64k' "$TEST_IMG" | _filter_qemu_io > >> > > > >This is the same patch as > >http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-11/msg00623.html, > >but while both are correct, both need to fix 119, too, I think. > > > >(And while I would be fine with merging this and then taking a follow-up > >patch, I don't think we need to hurry for 2.5. Releases and iotests > >don't really care about each other, other than that we should pass all > >the iotests before a release unless we know what's wrong and don't care.) > > > > thanks for your advice. I plan to fix 119 in a follow-up patch. > currently, 119 is notrun for s390x, and I hope to spend some time to > investigate it later. >
I'm sending a new version fixing both scripts. Fam