On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 09:43:48AM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 10:52:39PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >> tests/migration-test.c | 12 ++++++------
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/migration-test.c b/tests/migration-test.c
> >> index d81f22118b..f469235d0b 100644
> >> --- a/tests/migration-test.c
> >> +++ b/tests/migration-test.c
> >> @@ -440,13 +440,13 @@ static void test_migrate_start(QTestState **from,
> >> QTestState **to,
> >>
> >> if (strcmp(arch, "i386") == 0 || strcmp(arch, "x86_64") == 0) {
> >> init_bootfile_x86(bootpath);
> >> - cmd_src = g_strdup_printf("-machine accel=%s -m 150M"
> >> - " -name pcsource,debug-threads=on"
> >> + cmd_src = g_strdup_printf("-machine accel=%s -m 256M"
> >> + " -name source,debug-threads=on"
> >
> > A pure question: when will the name matter?
>
> It don't matter, but ARM didn't want to use the pcname, and decided for
> yet a different command line. I would like to have the same command
> line for all architectures. At least the less gratuitous differences.
>
> As you can guess, name don't matter at all., but telling ARNM people to
> be consistent with things that are not consistent .... O:-)
Ah, fine. :)
This test only support x86 and ppc for now, right?
(Btw, AFAIK debug-threads=on is only useful if any of us wants to
glance at thread names. In other words, would it be even simpler to
just remove that "-name" line? :-)
--
Peter Xu
