On 07/13/17 12:47, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 12 July 2017 at 00:43, Ben Warren <b...@skyportsystems.com> wrote: >> Yes, it’s definitely a setup time problem. With the values that are checked >> in, I can’t get it to fail on my setup, but if I wind the numbers down I see >> the same failure as Peter. So now we have the ages-old problem of “what new >> arbitrary value should I use that will not cause false failures but will >> eventually time out”. > > Empirically, we already have an answer to this, in the form > of the existing code in tests/boot-sector.c, which is used > by both that test and the bios-tables-test.c code to wait > for the BIOS initialization to complete, and which doesn't > cause false test timeouts in practice. > > Can we make this test just use that existing function to > wait for the BIOS to be done, rather than having its own > timeout loop?
This is incredibly cool. Now that I've looked at "tests/boot-sector.c" (again), I recall having seen it earlier, but I couldn't have remembered it off-hand. Perhaps this boot sector code should be factored out and moved to "tests/acpi-utils". Marc-André, do you think it would be feasible for the vmcoreinfo unit test as well? (Which is derived from the vmgenid unit test.) Thanks! Laszlo
