On 08.06.2018 20:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 07:23:06PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 08.06.2018 18:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 05:16:30PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
[...]
If there's a situation that shouldn't exist in the tree (ie
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 07:23:06PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 08.06.2018 18:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 05:16:30PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 8 June 2018 at 17:03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> Pull requests are somewhat different, they are usually
On 08.06.2018 18:24, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 05:16:30PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 8 June 2018 at 17:03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> Pull requests are somewhat different, they are usually tested for lack
>>> of warnings. This change didn't arrive as a result
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 05:16:30PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 8 June 2018 at 17:03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > 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
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 05:14:09PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 8 June 2018 at 16:59, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > The expected value tests are a debugging aid. They do not catch bugs and
> > aren't designed to. In particular the comparisons do not even run if
> > IASL isn't installed.
>
>
On 8 June 2018 at 17:03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 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 8 June 2018 at 16:59, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> The expected value tests are a debugging aid. They do not catch bugs and
> aren't designed to. In particular the comparisons do not even run if
> IASL isn't installed.
If they're not actually tests to catch bugs, maybe we shouldn't
be running
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:
>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 09:34:02AM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> 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
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:
>
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
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
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
13 matches
Mail list logo
