[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] bios-tables-test: do not ignore allowed diff list
From: |
Michael S. Tsirkin |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] bios-tables-test: do not ignore allowed diff list |
Date: |
Mon, 31 Oct 2022 08:44:33 -0400 |
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 01:31:04PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 06:52:11 -0400
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 11:49:42AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 11:11:48 -0400
> > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > we had such a beautiful structure for updating
> > > > expected files, designed to keep bisect working.
> > > > It turns out that we ignored the result of
> > > > the allow list checks unless all tables matched
> > > > anyway.
> > > >
> > > > Sigh.
> > >
> > > strange,
> > > it seems to be working fine (I mean white-listing) here
> >
> > it's pretty clear no? if we only check test_acpi_find_diff_allowed
> > when all tables match anyway, it won't help test pass.
>
> currently all_tables_match is accumulated value that starts with 'true'
Problem is, it can be false because of another unrelated table.
> and with the meaning 'do not explode unless at least a table was not
> explicitly whitelisted'
> [...]
> > > >
> > > > - all_tables_match = all_tables_match &&
> '&&' here serves as a trigger that lets flip always initial
> 'all_tables_match = true'
>
> > > > + all_tables_match = all_tables_match ||
> once it changes to '||' the all_tables_match will never flip to false
> and trigger
> g_assert(all_tables_match);
> at the end, when there is unexpected (non-whitelisted) table mismatch.
>
> Am I missing something?
I agree this patch is bad.
I did not record the issue I saw and don't really want to go
debugging. Will drop for now.
> > > > test_acpi_find_diff_allowed(exp_sdt);
> > > >
> > > > /*
> >