Re: [PATCH] tests: acpi: update path in rebuild-expected-aml

[Thomas Huth]

On 14/01/2020 17.51, Shameer Kolothum wrote:
> Since commit 1e8a1fae7464("test: Move qtests to a separate
> directory") qtests are now placed in a separate folder and
> this breaks the script used to rebuild the expected ACPI
> tables for bios-tables-test. Update the script with correct
> path.
> 
> Fixes: 1e8a1fae7464("test: Move qtests to a separate directory")
> Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum <address@hidden>
> ---
>  tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh 
> b/tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh
> index f89d4624bc..d44e511533 100755
> --- a/tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh
> +++ b/tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
>  
>  qemu_bins="x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 
> aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64"
>  
> -if [ ! -e "tests/bios-tables-test" ]; then
> +if [ ! -e "tests/qtest/bios-tables-test" ]; then
>      echo "Test: bios-tables-test is required! Run make check before this 
> script."
>      echo "Run this script from the build directory."
>      exit 1;
> @@ -26,11 +26,11 @@ for qemu in $qemu_bins; do
>          echo "Also, run this script from the build directory."
>          exit 1;
>      fi
> -    TEST_ACPI_REBUILD_AML=y QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=$qemu tests/bios-tables-test
> +    TEST_ACPI_REBUILD_AML=y QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=$qemu 
> tests/qtest/bios-tables-test
>  done
>  
>  eval `grep SRC_PATH= config-host.mak`
>  
> -echo '/* List of comma-separated changed AML files to ignore */' > 
> ${SRC_PATH}/tests/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h
> +echo '/* List of comma-separated changed AML files to ignore */' > 
> ${SRC_PATH}/tests/qtest/bios-tables-test-allowed-diff.h
>  
>  echo "The files were rebuilt and can be added to git."

Oh, sorry for missing that in my patch series ... is there maybe a way
that we could test this script in one of our CI pipelines so that it is
not so easy to miss?

Anyway, for this patch:

Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>