From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51530)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1WBnfv-0005CQ-0d
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:49:13 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1WBnfp-0004oH-2U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:49:06 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52635)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@redhat.com>) id 1WBnfo-0004oD-Rc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:49:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 16:48:57 +0100
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20140207154857.GC25412@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1391619677-32387-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<1391619677-32387-2-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1391619677-32387-2-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 1/5] tests: Add e1000 qtest
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 06:01:13PM +0100, Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
> +#include "libqtest.h"
> +
> +#include <glib.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include "qemu/osdep.h"

Please put <system.h> includes before "user.h" includes.  That way we
can be sure our macros don't mess up system headers.

> +
> +static void nop(void)
> +{
> +}

I suggest a comment here to explain the point of this test:
/* The point of this test case is just to instantiate the device */