On 1/18/19 12:47 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 13:38, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Peter!
>>
>> The following changes since commit 6f2f34177a25bffd6fd92a05e6e66c8d22d97094:
>>
>> Merge remote-tracking branch 'remotes/thibault/tags/samuel-thibault' into
>> staging (2019-01-15 18:32:57 +0000)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>
>> https://gitlab.com/huth/qemu.git tags/pull-request-2019-01-17
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 3f0832c85380321ef697d64342b389648f8abb1c:
>>
>> tests/hexloader-test: Don't pass -nographic to the QEMU under test
>> (2019-01-17 14:25:12 +0100)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> - Remove deprecated "ivshmem" legacy device
>> - Bug fix for vhost-user-test
>> - Use more CONFIG Makefile switches for qtests
>> - Get rid of global_qtests in some more qtests
>> - typedef cleanups
>> - Fixes for compiling with Clang
>> - Force C standard to gnu99
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In the netbsd VM, the ipmi-bt-test is consistently failing:
>
> MALLOC_PERTURB_=${MALLOC_PERTURB_:-$(( ${RANDOM:-0} % 255 + 1))}
> QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=i386-softmmu
> /qemu-system-i386 QTEST_QEMU_IMG=qemu-img tests/ipmi-bt-test -m=quick
> -k --tap < /dev/null | ./s
> cripts/tap-driver.pl --test-name="ipmi-bt-test"
> **
> ERROR:tests/ipmi-bt-test.c:319:test_connect: assertion failed: (rv == 1)
> ERROR - too few tests run (expected 4, got 0)
> [1] Abort trap (core dumped) MALLOC_PERTURB_=... |
> Done(1) ./scripts/tap-dr...
> /var/tmp/qemu-test.7opHvo/tests/Makefile.include:856: recipe for
> target 'check-qtest-i386' faile
> d
> gmake: *** [check-qtest-i386] Error 1
> gmake: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>
>
> This has been kind of intermittent for a while, I've seen
> it on-and-off, but with this pullreq it's failed four times
> in a row, so maybe something in here is making it less
> intermittent.
This file does:
qtest_add_func("/ipmi/extern/connect", test_connect);
qtest_add_func("/ipmi/extern/bt_base", test_bt_base);
qtest_add_func("/ipmi/extern/bt_enable_irq", test_enable_irq);
qtest_add_func("/ipmi/extern/bt_base_irq", test_bt_base);
ret = g_test_run();
The first "test" test_connect() binds emu_lfd, the 2nd test
test_bt_base() calls bt_cmd() which also use emu_lfd... could it be unbound?
This is racy, since (from g_test_run() doc):
"In general, the tests and sub-suites within each suite are run in the
order in which they are defined. [...]
However, you should never make the actual result of a test depend on the
order that tests are run in. If you need to ensure that some particular
code runs before or after a given test case, use g_test_add(), which
lets you specify setup and teardown functions."
