Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] tests/data/acpi/virt: Move ACPI tables under aarch64

[Sunil V L]

On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 05:20:50AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 11:17:43AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 May 2024 20:46:29 +0530
> > Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 12:12:10PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > > Hi Sunil,
> > > > 
> > > > On 24/5/24 08:14, Sunil V L wrote:  
> > > > > Since virt is a common machine name across architectures like ARM64 
> > > > > and
> > > > > RISC-V, move existing ARM64 ACPI tables under aarch64 folder so that
> > > > > RISC-V tables can be added under riscv64 folder in future.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >   tests/data/acpi/virt/{ => aarch64}/APIC             | Bin  
> > > > 
> > > > The usual pattern is {target}/{machine}, so instead of:
> > > > 
> > > >   microvm/
> > > >   pc/
> > > >   q35/
> > > >   virt/aarch64/
> > > >   virt/riscv64/
> > > > 
> > > > (which is odd because q35 is the x86 'virt'), I'd rather see:
> > > > 
> > > >   x86/microvm/
> > > >   x86/pc/
> > > >   x86/q35/
> > > >   aarch64/virt/
> > > >   riscv64/virt/
> > > > 
> > > > Anyhow just my 2 cents, up to the ACPI maintainers :)
> > > >   
> > > Hi Phil,
> > > 
> > > Your suggestion does make sense to me. Let me wait for feedback from
> > > ARM/ACPI maintainers.
> > 
> > I'd prefer  {target}/{machine} hierarchy like Philippe suggests
> 
> Agreed.
> 
Thanks for the confirmation!. Let me send the updated version soon.

Moving pc/q35/microvm also under new x86 would need many changes in
bios-table-test.c. So, the question is, are you ok to combine x86
changes as well in this series or prefer to it later in separate series?

Thanks,
Sunil