Hi Aditya, One comment below.
On 23/06/26 19:49, Aditya Gupta wrote:
@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ static void test_spi_seeprom(const void *data)
const PnvChip *chip = data;
QTestState *qts = NULL;
g_autofree char *tmp_path = NULL;
+ const char *machine = "powernv10";
Would it make sense to introduce `pnv_get_machine_type()` in patch 2 instead of patch 3? That would avoid hardcoding `"powernv10"` here and allow this patch to use the helper directly. Otherwise, the patch looks good to me. Thanks, Nikhil
