On 11/14/2015 03:37 AM, Shivaprasad G Bhat wrote:
The next few patches implement the vfio-pci tests. So,
change the test case to test the negative test case on
pciback instead.
Signed-off-by: Shivaprasad G Bhat <sb...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
tests/virpcimock.c | 2 +-
tests/virpcitest.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/virpcimock.c b/tests/virpcimock.c
index 0b49290..0724a36 100644
--- a/tests/virpcimock.c
+++ b/tests/virpcimock.c
@@ -815,7 +815,7 @@ init_env(void)
MAKE_PCI_DRIVER("iwlwifi", 0x8086, 0x0044);
MAKE_PCI_DRIVER("i915", 0x8086, 0x0046, 0x8086, 0x0047);
MAKE_PCI_DRIVER("pci-stub", -1, -1);
- pci_driver_new("vfio-pci", PCI_ACTION_BIND, -1, -1);
+ pci_driver_new("pciback", PCI_ACTION_BIND, -1, -1);
Is there a specific reason for making this the name of a stub driver
that we support in the real driver, but not in the test driver? Or would
the test be served just as well with some other random name?
Or, maybe we really do want it to be vfio-pci so that we will test
failure paths when the driver is vfio-pci.
Either way, I'm not certain that changing this to "pciback" is the right
thing. (not certain that it *isn't* either, which is why I Cc'ed
jdenemar :-)
# define MAKE_PCI_DEVICE(Id, Vendor, Device, ...) \
do { \
diff --git a/tests/virpcitest.c b/tests/virpcitest.c
index d4d3253..25591f9 100644
--- a/tests/virpcitest.c
+++ b/tests/virpcitest.c
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ testVirPCIDeviceDetachFail(const void *opaque)
if (!dev)
goto cleanup;
- if (virPCIDeviceSetStubDriver(dev, "vfio-pci") < 0)
+ if (virPCIDeviceSetStubDriver(dev, "pciback") < 0)
goto cleanup;
if (virPCIDeviceDetach(dev, NULL, NULL) < 0) {
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
