On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 06:07:13AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 11:04:30AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > If it is actually booting a real guest image (from biosbits) and interacting > > with it, then it does feel like the scope of this testing is more > > appropriate > > to QEMU's avocado framework than qtest, especially given the desire to use > > python for it all. > > > > With regards, > > Daniel > > I feel avocado is directed towards booting full fledged guest OS.
That's essentially what this is doing - its a custom guest OS rather than a common distro IIUC > It makes it much easier to figure out guest issues but it also > prone to false positives and is harder to debug as a result. > Booting a minimal image like this shouldn't require that. Well avocado is as reliable as the tests you write for it. The problems are largely around the images being used in avocado. If the biosbits testing system is reliable, then avocado will be too, and if they not reliable, then it will affect qtest too. 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 :|
