On 9/27/21 18:53, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 9/27/21 18:44, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> On 9/27/21 06:48, David Gibson wrote: >>> machine_ppc.py contains tests for 3 different ppc based machine >>> types. It >>> is listed in MAINTAINERS along with the PPC TCG cpu code. That's not >>> really accurate though, since it's really more about testing those >>> machines >>> than the CPUs. >>> >>> Therefore, split it up into separate files for the separate machine >>> types, >>> and list those along with their machine types in MAINTAINERS. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> >>> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> >>> --- >>> MAINTAINERS | 4 +- >>> tests/acceptance/machine_ppc.py | 69 ---------------------------- >>> tests/acceptance/ppc_mpc8544ds.py | 32 +++++++++++++ >>> tests/acceptance/ppc_pseries.py | 35 ++++++++++++++ >>> tests/acceptance/ppc_virtex_ml507.py | 34 ++++++++++++++ >>> 5 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-) >>> delete mode 100644 tests/acceptance/machine_ppc.py >>> create mode 100644 tests/acceptance/ppc_mpc8544ds.py >>> create mode 100644 tests/acceptance/ppc_pseries.py >>> create mode 100644 tests/acceptance/ppc_virtex_ml507.py >> >> Since I'm preparing an integration-testing pull request, >> I'll queue this single patch directly, to avoid future >> merge conflicts. >> > > Should I resend this patch ? > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/qemu-devel/patch/20210817093036.1288791-1-...@kaod.org/
Doh, I scanned the list for patches unattended during the last 8 months but apparently missed it. No need to resend.