Bug 10847 - testimage: add the ability to test dynamic IP addr targets
Summary: testimage: add the ability to test dynamic IP addr targets
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Runtime Testing
Classification: QA/Testing
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 5.99
Hardware: x86 Multiple
: Medium enhancement
Target Milestone: Future
Assignee: Unassigned
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-12-22 17:23 UTC by Benjamin Esquivel
Modified: 2026-07-30 15:26 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

See Also:
OS type for building Yocto: ---
Type of Regression: ---
Verified:
Documentation change: Yes (doc changes required)

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Benjamin Esquivel 2016-12-22 17:23:29 UTC 
with issues like bug 10833 where setting a fixed IP on images for testing makes little sense, it is proposed to have the testimage procedure to support targets coming up dynamic IP addresses.

The following dynamic IP address support would have to be implemented:
 
* testimage support
** setting/detection of fixed IPs vs. dynamic IPs
* runqemu support
** DHCP service
** device management
* image support 
** boot-up network on DHCP
** make it part of debug-tweaks, perhaps
Comment 1 Ed Bartosh 2016-12-22 21:25:31 UTC 
Can you elaborate a bit on 'setting a fixed IP on images for testing makes little sense', please? Isn't it what we're currently using?
Comment 2 Benjamin Esquivel 2016-12-22 21:32:15 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you elaborate a bit on 'setting a fixed IP on images for testing makes
> little sense', please? Isn't it what we're currently using?

yes, if you only look at the fixed IPs portion of the line, indeed it is currently what we're using. The comment is about being able to use both, what exists (fixed IPs for testing) vs. the proposed (dynamic IPs for testing).

Makes better sense?
Comment 3 Ed Bartosh 2016-12-22 21:38:50 UTC 
Yes, this makes sense. Thanks.

However, I'm still a bit concerned with the potential complexity of this setup. Would it be better to use serial interface? What exactly setting, running and maintaining dhcp infrastructure would give us? Would it mean that to run test suite on my machine I'd need to also setup dhcpd infrastructure?
Comment 4 Benjamin Esquivel 2016-12-22 22:52:05 UTC 
(In reply to comment #3)
> Yes, this makes sense. Thanks.
> 
> However, I'm still a bit concerned with the potential complexity of this
> setup. Would it be better to use serial interface? What exactly setting,
> running and maintaining dhcp infrastructure would give us? Would it mean
> that to run test suite on my machine I'd need to also setup dhcpd
> infrastructure?
Agreed, as I was filing this bug and finding out the implications of it, I realized the complexity of it.

I commented on bug 10833 that adapting the serial interface procedure to the automation would be a way to solve such problem.

Still, dynamic IP addresses for test targets would be a consolidated solution that might be worth looking for future releases.
Comment 5 Armin Kuster 2019-12-22 18:41:08 UTC 
With multiconfig that may be possible.