Re: [PATCH v5 10/11] hw/arm: Wire up BMC boot flash for npcm750-evb and quanta-gsj

[Thomas Huth]

On 17/07/2020 09.48, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> +Thomas

> On 7/16/20 10:56 PM, Havard Skinnemoen wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 1:54 PM Havard Skinnemoen
>> <hskinnemoen@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 3:57 AM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 7/15/20 11:00 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>>> Now my point.  Why first make up user configuration, then use that to
>>>>> create a BlockBackend, when you could just go ahead and create the
>>>>> BlockBackend?
>>>>
>>>> CLI issue mostly.
>>>>
>>>> We can solve it similarly to the recent "sdcard: Do not allow invalid SD
>>>> card sizes" patch:
>>>>
>>>>  if (!dinfo) {
>>>>      error_setg(errp, "Missing SPI flash drive");
>>>>      error_append_hint(errp, "You can use a dummy drive using:\n");
>>>>      error_append_hint(errp, "-drive if=mtd,driver=null-co,"
>>>>                              "read-ones=on,size=64M\n);
>>>>      return;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> having npcm7xx_connect_flash() taking an Error* argument,
>>>> and MachineClass::init() call it with &error_fatal.
>>>
>>> Erroring out if the user specifies a configuration that can't possibly
>>> boot sounds good to me. Better than trying to come up with defaults
>>> that are still not going to result in a bootable system.
>>>
>>> For testing recovery paths, I think it makes sense to explicitly
>>> specify a null device as you suggest.
>>
>> Hmm, one problem. qom-test fails with
>>
>> qemu-system-aarch64: Missing SPI flash drive
>> You can add a dummy drive using:
>> -drive if=mtd,driver=null-co,read-zeroes=on,size=32M
>> Broken pipe
>> /usr/local/google/home/hskinnemoen/qemu/for-upstream/tests/qtest/libqtest.c:166:
>> kill_qemu() tried to terminate QEMU process but encountered exit
>> status 1 (expected 0)
>> ERROR qom-test - too few tests run (expected 68, got 7)
>>
>> So it looks like we might need a different solution to this, unless we
>> want to make generic tests more machine-aware...

I didn't follow the other mails in this thread, but what we usually do
in such a case: Add a "if (qtest_enabled())" check to the device or the
machine to ignore the error if it is running in qtest mode.

 Thomas