Bug 15021

Summary: inconsistent usage of qemu.run and qemu.run_serial
Product: [QA/Testing] Test Plans/Suite Reporter: Louis Rannou <louis.rannou>
Component: test-plans/suiteAssignee: Unassigned <unassigned>
Status: IN PROGRESS REVIEW --- QA Contact:
Severity: enhancement    
Priority: Medium CC: louis.rannou, randy.macleod
Version: unspecified   
Target Milestone: 6.2   
Hardware: x86   
OS: Multiple   
Whiteboard:
OS type for building Yocto: --- Type of Regression: ---
Verified: Documentation change: Don't know

Description Louis Rannou 2023-01-27 15:18:00 UTC 
qemu.run_serial returns 1 on success and 0 on failure while the ssh qemu.run command returns 0 and -N on failure

In tests, both are used the same way:
status, output = qemu.run(cmd)
status, output = qemu.run_serial(cmd) 

This is confusing, maybe both functions should have a similar return.

For information, the ssh runner uses the python module subprocess https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html

run_serial should be changed to match the subprocess usage:
- return 0 in case of success
- return N in case of failure
- add an option check. if true raise an error

Note that the ssh command allow much more setting (stdin, stderr, stdout...)
Comment 1 Randy MacLeod 2023-02-02 15:35:57 UTC 
Louis can you send a patch?
Comment 2 Louis Rannou 2023-02-03 11:57:03 UTC 
It is possible for me to work on the subject. Perhaps I was waiting from an external point of view.

Changing the behaviour of the method run_serial and will break actual usages.

Then, should we create a distinct method (serial_run for example) and deprecate this one ? Or should we change run_serial and patch its usage in oe-core ?
Comment 3 Randy MacLeod 2023-02-09 22:19:50 UTC 
Louis, 
The best approach is to make a change and send the patch to the email list for review or if you really want feedback on the approach, just send an email describing the problem, pointing to this bug and suggest the approach you plan to take. 
Thanks,
../Randy
Comment 4 Randy MacLeod 2023-04-21 18:45:44 UTC 
Moved en masse from 4.2 to 4.3 by Randy.
Comment 6 Randy MacLeod 2024-01-18 16:17:28 UTC 
There is a patch but it needs some additional work.
Louis if you can continue, please assign this bug to back to yourself. 
Thanks.
Comment 7 Randy MacLeod 2024-04-25 01:13:52 UTC 
Bulk move of 5.0 medium importance issues to 5.99.
Move to 5.1 if you want to actively work on an issue.
Comment 8 Randy MacLeod 2024-04-25 01:23:13 UTC 
Move to 5.99 since no one is actively working on this issue.
Move to 5.x if you start on a task, please.