Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST PATCH v2 10/12] make-flight: create XSM test jobs

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 04:41:07PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wei Liu writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH v2 10/12] make-flight: create XSM test 
> jobs"):
> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 05:00:15PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > +  # xsm tests for versions > 4.4, arch amd64 and armhf
> > > > +  case "$xenbranch:$xenarch" in
> > > > +  xen-3.*-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  xen-4.0-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  xen-4.1-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  xen-4.2-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  xen-4.3-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  xen-4.4-testing:*) test_xsm="n";;
> > > > +  *:amd64|armhf)     test_xsm="n y";;
> > > 
> > > I seem to remember this table appearing in a previous patch in this
> > > series, so now you have two copies of it.  Please have only one.
> > 
> > I don't think it's right to make have only one. That would mean leaking
> > a global variable to another script.
> 
> It doesn't have to mean that.  There could be a shell function in
> mfi-common.  Cf branch_wants_rumpkernel_tests.
> 

I see. I will make a function called xenbranch_wants_xsm_tests.

> > It's a bit like test_xend in make-flight v.s. build_defxend in
> > mfi-common. I think changing test_xsm to build_xsm in mfi-common may
> > make things clearer.
> 
> The xend stuff is different because the two tables have different
> contents.  (Because of the different defaults in various versions of
> Xen.)
> 
> Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel