Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/2] i2c: Add AT24Cxx EEPROM model

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2013-02-23 15:08, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 23.02.2013 15:02, schrieb Jan Kiszka:
>> On 2013-02-23 14:12, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> Am 22.02.2013 21:39, schrieb Jan Kiszka:
>>>> Rebased over current master, resolved new reports of
>>>> checkpatch.
>>>
>>> This doesn't really take all developments in master into
>>> account, comments on 2/2.
> 
>> Yeah, that happens if such patches wait too long for being applied
>> (3 months). Will address the QOM changes, but I need to check back
>> with $customer regarding test suite efforts.
> 
> Thanks. My concern here is in particular that this device is not added
> to any machine, so it gets no implicit testing. Nor does the commit
> message or cover letter specify with which command line and guest it
> has been tested.

The device is target-agnostic, naturally. We use it with versatilepb.

> Whether all code paths actually get test coverage is
> less relevant to me than a smoke test to assure my QOM refactorings
> don't break anything. :)

Even that is not trivial. Unless something in the guest actively pokes
the device, nothing will happen.

To make a useful basic test, you need to enable the device in the guest
(echo <type> <addr> > /sys/bus/i2c/devices/i2c-0/new_device), read from
it (/sys/.../eeprom) and compare the result against the expected
content. Writing/write-protection tests would make some sense, too.

I will have to look closer at what the test infrastructure provides in
this regard - and if the target kernel is already supporting AT24.

Jan

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature