From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc: Add tests for sPAPR h-calls
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:33:19 +0100
Message-ID: <56D6C16F.7060407@redhat.com>
References: <1456908043-11184-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com>
 <56D6BB7B.70401@redhat.com> <56D6BEDE.7030403@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dgibson@redhat.com
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, drjones@redhat.com
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57147 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753801AbcCBKd2 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 2 Mar 2016 05:33:28 -0500
In-Reply-To: <56D6BEDE.7030403@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>



On 02/03/2016 11:22, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/03/2016 11:07, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>> +	report_xfail("h-call available", rc == H_FUNCTION, rc == H_SUCCESS);
>>>> +	if (rc != H_SUCCESS)
>>>> +		return;
>> I think it can be disturbing to not always have the same number of
>> tests, so remove the initial checking and use the report_xfail on the
>> following report.
>>
>>
> 
> It's actually fairly common, see for example x86/apic and x86/xsave tests.

OK, so you can add my

Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>

to this patch (the other comment about asm() doesn't worth a re-spin)

Laurent