On 02.06.2016 05:17, David Gibson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 08:03:08AM +0100, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: >> On 01/06/16 03:15, David Gibson wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:28:49PM +0100, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: [...] >>>> Note that there is also another regression that has recently landed in >>>> git master so you'll also need to revert >>>> e7c9136977cb99c6eb52c9139f7b8d8b5fa87db9 in order to get back to a >>>> functioning OpenBIOS. >>> >>> I'd preter to see it fixed rather than just reverted.. >> >> Looks like the original author has found the bug, so there should be a >> fix coming up for this soon (I only included it here in case you needed >> an explicit test case). > > Ok. > > So, yeah, I'm not really set up to test Mac machines which means I > don't easily catch regressions like this. > > Mark, > > Could you look into adding a testcase to "make check" that will at > least catch these unsubtle breaks boot type regressions?
I think I've just found a nice way to check whether the OpenBIOS machines can at least successfully run through the OpenBIOS boot sequence: You can use the "-prom-env" parameter of QEMU to execute some Forth code there, so this can be used to signal a successful test to the qtest environment. Unless you've got a better test in the works already, I polish up my patch and submit it later today or tomorrow... Thomas
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
