Am 04.11.2016 um 17:07 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 04:56:29PM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 29.10.2016 um 03:48 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: >>> The object_property_add_bool() call in dummy_init() is always >>> failing because there is an existing "bv" class property. We need >>> to remove either the "bv" class property or the "bv" instance >>> property. >>> >>> Remove the class property so both object properties and class >>> properties are covered by the test code. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> Changes series v2 -> v3: >>> * Patch imported from "tests: A few check-qom-proplist fixes" >>> series >>> * Reworded commit message for clarity >> >> So I understand this patch was reordered from a previous separate >> series. Surely Peter did not merge any pulls that cause test failures, >> so the first paragraph in the commit message needs rewording? > > The object_property_add_bool() call is always failing on current > master. It doesn't mean the test case is failing (because the > errors reported by object_property_add_bool() are being silently > ignored). > > Would it be clearer if I rewrite it as "The object_property_add_bool() > call in dummy_init() is always failing (but the error is being > silently ignored) because [...]"?
Thanks, I can make that tweak myself then. Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)