On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 12:49 +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:

On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:21:29 +1100
Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Greg Kurz <redacted>

The goal is to verify vphn_unpack_associativity() parses VPHN numbers
correctly. We feed it with a variety of input values and compare with
expected results.

PAPR+ does not say much about VPHN parsing: I came up with a list of
tests that check many simple cases and some corner ones. I wouldn't
dare to say the list is exhaustive though.

Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <redacted>
[mpe: Rework harness logic and rename to test-vphn]
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
---

I reworked this a little bit, let me know if it looks OK to you.

I renamed the test to test-vphn, and I changed the test loop to only call the
harness once, but report all the individual test results as well.

I guess it is safe to assume we don't have an infinite loop bug hidding in
each individual test case.

Well if we do the whole test will be killed by the harness, so we'll still
notice.

I am okay with the changes. I don't know if it is needed but here's my:

Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <redacted>

 
Thanks.

cheers