From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58401)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <he.chen@linux.intel.com>) id 1d42Mi-0001MW-Ql
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 05:39:05 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <he.chen@linux.intel.com>) id 1d42Mf-0005F3-Mr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 05:39:04 -0400
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:53600)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <he.chen@linux.intel.com>)
	id 1d42Mf-00052o-DH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Apr 2017 05:39:01 -0400
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 17:39:11 +0800
From: He Chen <he.chen@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <20170428093911.GA26067@he>
References: <1493260558-20728-1-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com>
	<24766133-5384-09fd-a24a-8acf964c9367@redhat.com>
	<20170427153222.5d991d2b@nial.brq.redhat.com>
	<874lxa2bex.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
	<20170427164626.78f65611@nial.brq.redhat.com>
	<20170427202551.GL3482@thinpad.lan.raisama.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170427202551.GL3482@thinpad.lan.raisama.net>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v9] Allow setting NUMA distance for
 different NUMA nodes
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: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 05:25:51PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 04:46:26PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:05:42 +0200
> > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> writes:
> > > > On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:54:31 -0500
> > > > Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > > >> 
> > > >> Markus has asked that all new QMP commands have some testsuite exposure;
> > > >> he may have some advice on what test would be best to modify to give us
> > > >> some coverage of this feature.  
> > > 
> > > I can't see the QMP command here, but...
> > > 
> > > > Since it's basically validation of SLIT table, the test case
> > > > should be added to tests/bios-tables-test.c  
> > > 
> > > ... I figure there's new stuff to test all the same.
> > it could be a patch on top and doesn't have to hold this one if
> > author promises to write testcase
> 
> Agreed. I'm applying this to my machine-next branch, but I would
> like to get test cases before including it in a pull request.
> 
You mean we also need a patch to add test case to
tests/bios-tables-test.c, right? If so, I am very willing to cook and
submit it.