On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 06:08:35 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 11:16:16AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 12:26:16 -0400
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:35:00AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote:  
> > > > HPET AML doesn't depend on piix4 nor q35, move code buiding it
> > > > to common scope to avoid duplication.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>    
> > > 
> > > Apropos, tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh ignores the
> > > fact that some tables might be identical. Also, there's no
> > > way to reuse expected files between machines. And so we have:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [qemu]$ find tests/data/acpi -type f -exec sha256sum '{}' ';'|sort  
> > [...]
> >   
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It's easy to fix up duplications within virt. But I am not 100% sure how
> > > fix up duplication between q35 and pc.  
> > [...]
> >    
> > > Then we could maybe use the directory "pc" for files common to i440fx
> > > and q35.  Maybe just teach the test to look under tests/data/acpi/x86
> > > too? And I think we should teach tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh
> > > to check for duplicates and at least warn the user.  
> > 
> > Probably duplicates in 'virt' mostly due to combination of not knowing
> > that there is a fallback lookup (which is hidden in the code)
> > and simplistic way tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh rebuilds tables.
> > 
> > As you suggest, rebuild-expected-aml.sh can be improved to warn or even
> > better drop duplicates if found.  
> 
> Want to try?

I'll put it on my queue, after PCI refactorings

> 
> > As for reusing tables between different machine types, alternatively
> > we can add explicit remapping rules (possibly auto-generated) versus
> > currently used implicit fallback approach.  
> 
> My worry with this is that if a specific table needs to be split from
> the generic variant then user would have to hack the test code as opposed
> to just updating the tables, so the update can not be done
> automatically. Thoughts?

I'll try to implement it and see if it's possible.


Reply via email to