On 05/16/2016 09:57 AM, Chun Yan Liu wrote: > > >>>> On 5/14/2016 at 12:58 AM, in message <5736079B.5050308@xxxxxxxx>, Jim Fehlig > <jfehlig@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 05/13/2016 07:08 AM, Joao Martins wrote: >>> I am not sure what's the etiquette in these cases but I sent you some >> patches >>> that fixes the tests and makes some adjustments to help out (all >> changelog-ed). >>> There were a couple of failures lately regarding vram defaults and what not >> so >>> some of the tests would fail as vram defaults would be wrongly calculated. >> Jim >>> sent a series fixing that which is Acked already but still to be pushed. >> >> I've pushed those patches now. I think we've finally resolved all the >> default >> vram issues. > > Joao, I applied your updated patch series, it looks good. Maybe you can send > out to mailing list? Sure! But maybe it's not worth such a big change involving the tests and we should probably wait until something more substantial is required from the vif parsing side [0]. So the initial approach is the one to go - requiring mainly a slight interface change. Jim suggested having an enum to identify which flavor ParseCommon is invoked - which is generic enough representation to handle any trivial disparities between XL and XM. Joao [0] https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-May/msg01002.html -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list