On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:30:05PM +0100, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > On 12/07/2012 10:44 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > 1 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-) > > > >Given the complexity the parsing it would be nice to add a test > >case for this. It is a shame we don't already have a test case > >for the sysinfo code in fact :-( I'd like to see test/virsysinfotest.c > >to validate this parsing. Take a 'char *str' containing representation > >data from /proc/sysinfo, run it through the parser & then validate the > >result. > > > >Daniel > > > > Makes sense ... as this is platform-specific (ifdef'd) code: should I > try to (by refactoring) make the s390 code testable on other platforms > or do you think it's sufficient to have make check execute the test > case on the target platform only, e.g. during RPM build. > Either way: the checks for DMI-based sysinfo and PPC would have to be > provided by the respective authors... I think we only need to test the code associated with the platform being built for. So just make the test case code you add be #ifdef s390 too, and x86 authors can follow up with their own impl later. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list