On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 14:22 +0530, sudhir kumar wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues<lmr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Adding iperf network performance test. Basically it tests > > networking functionality, stability and performance of guest OSes. > > This test is cross-platform -- i.e. it works on both Linux and > > Windows VMs. > > > > I have a question here. Why are we adding iperf in a way different > than other tests ? We have client/tests/<different_tests> directory > for each test which contains the python modules and the test tarball. > Then why in case of iperf we are putting it under client/tests/kvm and > modifying kvm.py instead of putting the testsuit as part of > autotest(run_autotest is not enough?)? Even if we do not want to touch > the existing iperf test in autotest we can use a separate name like > kvm_iperf. Somehow I have a feeling that there was a discussion on the > list for keeping tests under a particular directory. But still I feel > that should be only for tests specific to KVM and not the guest. Is > there any disadvantage of using the current approach of executing > these testsuits ? Since the kvm subtests are contained under the kvm test dir, adding the kvm_ file prefixes to the subtests is not necessary IMHO. Using the autotest iperf test is doable for linux guests, though it doesn't work for windows guests, that's why Alexey decided to implement it from scratch. Lucas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
