v1: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-03/msg01471.html
v2: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-05/msg00492.html


Hi,

When reviewing Vladimir’s new addition to tests/, I noticed that 297 so
far does not cover named tests.  That isn’t so good.

This series makes it cover them, and because tests/ is rather sparse at
this point, I decided to also fix up the two tests in there that don’t
pass pylint’s scrutiny yet.  I think it would be nice if we could keep
all of tests/ clean.


v3:
- Fixed patch 3: Turns out replacing `lambda self: mc(self)` by just
  `mc` (as pylint suggests) breaks the test.  So leave it as it is and
  instead disable the warning locally.


git-backport-diff against v3:

Key:
[----] : patches are identical
[####] : number of functional differences between upstream/downstream patch
[down] : patch is downstream-only
The flags [FC] indicate (F)unctional and (C)ontextual differences, respectively

001/4:[----] [--] 'iotests/297: Drop 169 and 199 from the skip list'
002/4:[----] [--] 'migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test: Fix pylint warnings'
003/4:[0005] [FC] 'migrate-bitmaps-test: Fix pylint warnings'
004/4:[----] [--] 'iotests/297: Cover tests/'


Max Reitz (4):
  iotests/297: Drop 169 and 199 from the skip list
  migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test: Fix pylint warnings
  migrate-bitmaps-test: Fix pylint warnings
  iotests/297: Cover tests/

 tests/qemu-iotests/297                        |  7 ++--
 .../tests/migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test       | 13 +++---
 tests/qemu-iotests/tests/migrate-bitmaps-test | 41 +++++++++++--------
 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

-- 
2.31.1

A kind of ping:)

Seems that never landed into master?

14.05.2021 18:43, Max Reitz wrote:
> v1: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-03/msg01471.html
> v2: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-05/msg00492.html
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> When reviewing Vladimir’s new addition to tests/, I noticed that 297 so
> far does not cover named tests.  That isn’t so good.
> 
> This series makes it cover them, and because tests/ is rather sparse at
> this point, I decided to also fix up the two tests in there that don’t
> pass pylint’s scrutiny yet.  I think it would be nice if we could keep
> all of tests/ clean.
> 
> 
> v3:
> - Fixed patch 3: Turns out replacing `lambda self: mc(self)` by just
>    `mc` (as pylint suggests) breaks the test.  So leave it as it is and
>    instead disable the warning locally.
> 
> 
> git-backport-diff against v3:
> 
> Key:
> [----] : patches are identical
> [####] : number of functional differences between upstream/downstream patch
> [down] : patch is downstream-only
> The flags [FC] indicate (F)unctional and (C)ontextual differences, respectively
> 
> 001/4:[----] [--] 'iotests/297: Drop 169 and 199 from the skip list'
> 002/4:[----] [--] 'migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test: Fix pylint warnings'
> 003/4:[0005] [FC] 'migrate-bitmaps-test: Fix pylint warnings'
> 004/4:[----] [--] 'iotests/297: Cover tests/'
> 
> 
> Max Reitz (4):
>    iotests/297: Drop 169 and 199 from the skip list
>    migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test: Fix pylint warnings
>    migrate-bitmaps-test: Fix pylint warnings
>    iotests/297: Cover tests/
> 
>   tests/qemu-iotests/297                        |  7 ++--
>   .../tests/migrate-bitmaps-postcopy-test       | 13 +++---
>   tests/qemu-iotests/tests/migrate-bitmaps-test | 41 +++++++++++--------
>   3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 


-- 
Best regards,
Vladimir

On 01.09.21 15:34, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> A kind of ping:)
>
> Seems that never landed into master?

Yes, that’s true…

I was waiting for John (CC-ed) to send v3 of 
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-07/msg00611.html, 
because in 
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-07/msg00611.html, 
John was proposing to have it include these patches here.

But I guess there was no plan to change the patches (other than 
correcting the comment in patch 3), so I suppose I might as well. (And 
it seems like John has other things going on, so I don’t want to exert 
pressure by waiting for a v3 with these patches O:))

But I think I do have to send v4, because of that comment.  I suppose 
there can be no harm in doing so.  (And now I really wonder why I 
haven’t done so all this time...)

Hanna