On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 07:17:51AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 08.06.2018 01:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:31:08PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote: > >> Currently if "make check" detects a mismatch in the ASL generated during > >> testing, we print an error such as: > >> > >> acpi-test: Warning! SSDT mismatch. Actual [asl:/tmp/asl-QZDWJZ.dsl, > >> aml:/tmp/aml-T8JYJZ], Expected [asl:/tmp/asl-DTWVJZ.dsl, > >> aml:tests/acpi-test-data/q35/SSDT.dimmpxm]. > >> > >> but the testing still exits with good shell status. This is wrong, and > >> makes bisecting such a failure difficult. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwis...@linux.intel.com> > > > > Failing would also mean that any change must update the expected files > > at the same time. And that in turn is problematic because expected > > files are binary and can't be merged. > > > > In other words the way we devel ACPI right now means that bisect will > > periodically produce a diff, it's not an error. > > But apparently the current way also allows that real bug go unnoticed > for a while, until somebody accidentially spots the warning in the > output of "make check". Wouldn't it be better to fail at CI time > already? If a merge of the file is required, you can still resolve that > manually (i.e. by rebasing one of the pull requests). > > Thomas
Pull requests are somewhat different, they are usually tested for lack of warnings. This change didn't arrive as a result of a pull request maybe that's why it slipped through the cracks. Peter? Maybe we need a "pedantic" flag to fail on any warnings, or just catch output to stderr. -- MST
