Re: [PATCH 1/3] tests/acceptance: Move the pseries test to a separate file

[Thomas Huth]

On 04/02/2021 09.52, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On 1/13/21 6:30 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 12/01/2021 19.50, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 1/12/21 1:40 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > > > Let's gather the POWER-related tests in a separate file.
> > >
> > >
> > > Did you consider having others ppc/ppc64 boot tests together too?
> > >
> > > Some candidates:
> > >
> > > tests/acceptance/boot_linux.py:BootLinuxPPC64.test_pseries_tcg
> > > tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc64_e500
> > > tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_g3beige
> > > tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py:BootLinuxConsole.test_ppc_mac99
> >
> > The e500, g3beige and mac99 tests are depending on the
> > do_test_advcal_2018() function in that file, so I think they should
> > rather stay there.
> >
> > > tests/acceptance/ppc_prep_40p.py:IbmPrep40pMachine.test_factory_firmware_and_netbsd
> > > tests/acceptance/ppc_prep_40p.py:IbmPrep40pMachine.test_openbios_192m
> > > tests/acceptance/ppc_prep_40p.py:IbmPrep40pMachine.test_openbios_and_netbsd
> >
> > That's a good point, I did not notice that file when writing my patches.
> > Philippe, since you've created this ppc_prep_40p.py file, what do you
> > think, should it be merged with the other ppc tests, or shall we rather
> > keep this separate?
>
> The choice was deliberate: the PReP machine has a different set of
> maintainers. If possible when we have a particular section in
> MAINTAINERS I'd like to use it as separation, to let the maintainers
> track changes in tests.

Ok, fair point, let's keep it separate then!

 Thomas