On 22 September 2016 at 17:07, Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net> wrote:
> On 09/22/2016 07:39 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>
>> Fails 'make check' on all platforms:
>>
>> TEST: tests/qom-test... (pid=7359)
>>   /avr/qom/none:                                                       OK
>>   /avr/qom/sample:
>> qemu-system-avr: Could not find flash image file '(null)'
>> Broken pipe
>> FAIL
>
>
> Ho hum.  I never considered that not touching tests/ would create new tests.
>
> For the record, how does arm handle the case of no -bios given?  Just
> blindly execute 0's without a warning?  Would it be better to allow
> execution of 0's or blacklist?

The usual approach to this is that you add "&& !qtest_enabled()" to the
check for "should we bomb out?". (see for instance mips_malta.c).
The qtest framework isn't ever going to try to execute anything,
it just creates the system and sets itself up so test cases can
prod it, and so there's no need for there to be executable code
present. (The purpose of the qom-test test is "check that the board
will at least instantiate itself without falling over"; you
can also write tests to do more interesting things.)

For actual-running of boards, ARM boards mostly will happily let you
run a pile of zeroes. Some other boards will complain if you
didn't provide a kernel or a bios image.

PS: probably better to avoid printf("...%s...", NULL) too.

thanks
-- PMM

Reply via email to