1. 27 6月, 2020 3 次提交
  2. 26 6月, 2020 2 次提交
    • J
      tests: ensure failure if input file doesn't exist · bac096ff
      Jonathon Jongsma 提交于
      When using the DO_TEST_PARSE_ERROR() macro, a failure to parse the input
      file is considered a successful test. However, if the input file is
      totally missing, that should be distinguished from a parsing error and
      not be treated as a test success.
      
      The function virDomainDefParseFile() simply returns NULL for any parse
      failure, including a missing file. So we need to explicitly check
      whether the file exists first, and fail the test if it is missing.
      Signed-off-by: NJonathon Jongsma <jjongsma@redhat.com>
      bac096ff
    • J
      qemu: ramfb video device doesn't support PCI address · 6c560b2d
      Jonathon Jongsma 提交于
      Although a ramfb video device is not a PCI device, we don't currently
      report an error for ramfb device definitions containing a PCI address.
      However, a guest configured with such a device will fail to start:
      
          # virsh start test1
          error: Failed to start domain test1
          error: internal error: qemu unexpectedly closed the monitor: 2020-06-16T05:23:02.759221Z qemu-kvm: -device ramfb,id=video0,bus=pcie.0,addr=0x1: Device 'ramfb' can't go on PCIE bus
      
      A better approach is to reject any device definitions that contain PCI
      addresses.  While this is a change in behavior, any existing
      configurations were non-functional.
      
      https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1847259Signed-off-by: NJonathon Jongsma <jjongsma@redhat.com>
      6c560b2d
  3. 23 6月, 2020 16 次提交
  4. 16 6月, 2020 1 次提交
  5. 10 6月, 2020 1 次提交
  6. 22 5月, 2020 1 次提交
    • M
      testCompareXMLToArgvValidateSchema: Construct @vm from scratch · 69daa2ea
      Michal Privoznik 提交于
      Currently, the @vm is passed in as an argument and
      testCompareXMLToArgvCreateArgs() is called over it which means
      under the hood qemuProcessPrepareDomain() is called. But at the
      point where ValidateSchema() is called, the domain object is
      already 'prepared', i.e. all device aliases are assigned and so
      on. But our code is not prepared to 'prepare' a domain twice - it
      simply overwrites all the pointers leading to a memory leak.
      
      Fortunately, this is only the problem of this test.
      
      Resolve this by constructing the domain object from scratch.
      Signed-off-by: NMichal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
      Reviewed-by: NPeter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
      69daa2ea
  7. 20 5月, 2020 3 次提交
  8. 13 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  9. 12 5月, 2020 4 次提交
  10. 08 5月, 2020 2 次提交
  11. 05 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  12. 27 4月, 2020 5 次提交