[Xen-devel] [PATCH OSSTEST] Toolstack: Do not pass -F to xm shutdown (Was: Re: [xen-4.2-testing test] 57630: regressions - FAIL)

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 01.06.15 at 10:34, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Toolstack: Do not pass -F to xm shutdown
> 
> This is a feature of xl only.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Osstest/Toolstack/xl.pm | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Osstest/Toolstack/xl.pm b/Osstest/Toolstack/xl.pm
> index dd12ae1..23328d3 100644
> --- a/Osstest/Toolstack/xl.pm
> +++ b/Osstest/Toolstack/xl.pm
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ sub shutdown_wait ($$$) {
>      my $ho = $self->{Host};
>      my $gn = $gho->{Name};
>      my $acpi_fallback = guest_var($gho,'acpi_shutdown','false') eq 'true'
> -     ? "F" : "";
> +     && $self->{Name} eq 'xl' ? "F" : "";
>      target_cmd_root($ho,"$self->{_Command} shutdown -w${acpi_fallback} $gn", 
> $timeout);

Well - to me, not knowing much about osstest's structure, catering
for xm in a file called xl.pm seems odd. And then, taking into
consideration a hypothetical 3rd toolstack, I wonder whether
assuming only xl supports -F (instead of "only xm does not support
it") is the more suitable check.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel