Ryan Harper wrote:
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-16 18:15]:
I think most kvm-tests will be client tests.
Agreed, the above examples will be client tests. Autotest client can do
parallel execution, or even step-wise. Between those, we should be able
to ensure we get proper covera
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-16 18:15]:
> >Client side, for installation, we already have a solution that works for
> >all types of guests:
> >
> >http://kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/KVMTest
> >
>
> >which is already integrated as a client test in autotest. Once you
> >record your instal
Ryan Harper wrote:
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-14 20:26]:
Ryan Harper wrote:
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-10 07:42]:
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
- As you mention, it should reuse the server/client model for run
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-14 20:26]:
> Ryan Harper wrote:
> >* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-10 07:42]:
> >>Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >>>On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>- As you mention, it should reuse the server/client model for runn
It's definitely worth looking at the autotest server code/samples.
There exists code in-tree already to build an deploy kvm via autotest
server mode which a single machine can drive the building, installing,
creation of guests on N number of clients, directing each guest
image to run various au
Ryan Harper wrote:
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-10 07:42]:
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
- As you mention, it should reuse the server/client model for running
tests inside guests. I hacked up a "kvm_autotest" test that
basical
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:09:36PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
The big problem with writing client tests is that you have to rewrite
what autotest already provides, diverging from mainline. That means work
to be done everytime a new test is added in autotest, which could come
* Uri Lublin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-10 07:42]:
> Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
> >>
> >>The test framework is based on autotest (
> >>http://test.kernel.org/autotest ).
> >>Currently we only using client tests, later we may want
Hi Uri,
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:09:36PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
> You see guests as clients and the host as the server.
> We were thinking of the host as a client and multi-host operations to be
> done by a server. guest-operations would be done using ssh (for linux
> guests) as your example
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
The test framework is based on autotest ( http://test.kernel.org/autotest ).
Currently we only using client tests, later we may want to use server tests
for more complicated tests.
This is looking great. Ea
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 01:16:13PM +0300, Uri Lublin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are happy to announce the availability of kvm-autotest, a test
> framework for KVM based on autotest. Naturally, the purpose is to make
> KVM stable, find/fix bugs faster and prevent regressions. It is to serve
> dev
Hello,
We are happy to announce the availability of kvm-autotest, a test framework
for KVM based on autotest. Naturally, the purpose is to make KVM stable,
find/fix bugs faster and prevent regressions. It is to serve developers, to test
if their new code breaks anything, as well as users,
12 matches
Mail list logo
