Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> writes:
> On 4/27/23 14:16, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>> Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/26/23 19:00, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>>>> We're about to move the 32-bit CPUs under CONFIG_TCG, so adjust the
>>>> query-cpu-model-expansion test to check against the cortex-a7, which
>>>> is already under CONFIG_TCG. That allows the next patch to contain
>>>> only code movement.
>>>>
>>>> While here add comments clarifying what we're testing.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Fabiano Rosas<faro...@suse.de>
>>>> Suggested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé<phi...@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>> tests/qtest/arm-cpu-features.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> I don't see why you're changing the cpu model here.
>>> Neither cpu will work, of course, but why change?
>>>
>>
>> Because there's already a patch in master that puts the cortex-a7 under
>> CONFIG_TCG, so I can have the whole if/else in this patch.
>>
>> If I keep the cortex-a15, this change needs to go into the next patch
>> ("move cpu_tcg to tcg/cpu32.c") which moves the rest of the 32bit cpus,
>> which was supposed to be only code movement.
>
> Well, I still think the change to a7 is wrong.
> If the two patches need to be merged to break bisection,
> then so be it -- just mention that fact in the commit message.
>
I don't get why it would be wrong. The test just needs any cpu model
that triggers the message at qmp_query_cpu_model_expansion.
