On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 11:52:38AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 09:42:45 -0500
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 03:35:56PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > On 06/02/2023 16.04, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
> > > > If we build with --without-default-devices, CONFIG_HPET and
> > > > CONFIG_PARALLEL are set to N, which makes the respective devices go
> > > > missing from acpi tables.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Fabiano Rosas <faro...@suse.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > I currently don't see a way of allowing the tests to pass in the
> > > > absence of these two configs. As far as I understand, we would need to
> > > > have one set of expected table files (tests/data/acpi) for each
> > > > combination of machine vs. possible CONFIG that can be toggled.
> > >
> > > I think you're right ... maintaining tables for each combination does not
> > > scale. Disabling the test in that case is likely the best we can do here
> > > right now.
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/tests/qtest/meson.build b/tests/qtest/meson.build
> > > > index a930706a43..2829eda2c9 100644
> > > > --- a/tests/qtest/meson.build
> > > > +++ b/tests/qtest/meson.build
> > > > @@ -78,7 +78,9 @@ qtests_i386 = \
> > > > config_all_devices.has_key('CONFIG_Q35') and
> > > > \
> > > > config_all_devices.has_key('CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI') and
> > > > \
> > > > slirp.found() ? ['virtio-net-failover'] : []) +
> > > > \
> > > > - (unpack_edk2_blobs ? ['bios-tables-test'] : []) +
> > > > \
> > > > + (unpack_edk2_blobs and
> > > > \
> > > > + config_all_devices.has_key('CONFIG_HPET') and
> > > > \
> > > > + config_all_devices.has_key('CONFIG_PARALLEL') ?
> > > > ['bios-tables-test'] : []) + \
> > > > qtests_pci +
> > > > \
> > > > qtests_cxl +
> > > > \
> > > > ['fdc-test',
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
> >
> >
> > One thing we could do is move this code to an SSDT by itself. Then
> > there's two variants of e.g. HPET SSDT: with and without CONFIG_HPET.
> > Needs ACPI work though. Igor what do you think? Worth it?
>
> I'd go with just disabling test in this case.
ok for now.
> having dedicated ACPI tables for each permutation config changes
> might cause doesn't look to me as sustainable.
>
I feel I was unclear. What I am proposing is not that we add SSDT
for each permutation.
What I am saying is basically this: we have build_hpet_aml. call it
from a separate SSDT. Now with HPET we check this expected SSDT.
Without HPET we don't have this SSDT so nothing to check.
--
MST
