On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 06:18:01PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 17:16:46 +0000 > Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> > > > > Following patches will add a new ACPI table, the > > CXL Early Discovery Table (CEDT). > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]> > > --- > > tests/data/acpi/pc/CEDT | 0 > > tests/data/acpi/q35/CEDT | 0 > > tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h | 2 ++ > > 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/pc/CEDT b/tests/data/acpi/pc/CEDT > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000..e69de29bb2 > > diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/q35/CEDT b/tests/data/acpi/q35/CEDT > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000..e69de29bb2 > > diff --git a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h > > b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h > > index dfb8523c8b..9b07f1e1ff 100644 > > --- a/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h > > +++ b/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h > > @@ -1 +1,3 @@ > > /* List of comma-separated changed AML files to ignore */ > > +"tests/data/acpi/pc/CEDT", > > +"tests/data/acpi/q35/CEDT", > > Whilst reordering the series to allow partial sets to be picked up > it occurred to me that there is reason why we should now generate a CEDT > table unless cxl=on is set for the relevant machine.
Absolutely. But this is just an example, it's an instance of a bigger issue: skipping new features when they are off reduces the chance of legacy guest breakage. > Adding the relevant conditions means we can avoid this dance > to add effectively empty CEDT tables. I have added a proper > test for to bios-test-tables but that can be introduced once > everything is in place, rather than as we go along (whereas > for qtests/cxl-test.c I am doing a series of updates as the > functionality is built up.). > > Makes for a simpler patch series to update. > > Jonathan
