Erich Hoover wrote:
Real Name: Erich Hoover Description: Patch 2 added support for the "all processors" flag, so this is no-longer a todo. This version is against the revised patch 1, please note that patch 2 is unchanged. ChangeLog: kernel32/tests: Test for 'all processors' now valid.
Patches 2 and 3 should be merged. If patch 2 is applied without patch 3, then we'll get "test succeeded inside todo block" failures.
Chip
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Charles Davis cdavis@mymail.mines.edu wrote:
Erich Hoover wrote:
Real Name: Erich Hoover Description: Patch 2 added support for the "all processors" flag, so this is no-longer a todo. This version is against the revised patch 1, please note that patch 2 is unchanged. ChangeLog: kernel32/tests: Test for 'all processors' now valid.
Patches 2 and 3 should be merged. If patch 2 is applied without patch 3, then we'll get "test succeeded inside todo block" failures.
Chip
What is the appropriate log notation for this? Is it "ntdll,kernel32/tests" ? Thanks.
Erich Hoover ehoover@mines.edu
On 19 February 2010 15:30, Erich Hoover ehoover@mines.edu wrote:
What is the appropriate log notation for this? Is it "ntdll,kernel32/tests" ? Thanks.
You'd just use the subject from patch 2, "ntdll: ...". However, I think a more logical way to do this would be to first send a patch for ntdll + tests, and send a test for kernel32 afterwards to prove it's consistent with ntdll. Sending the test before the series is (IMO) something you do when it's not entirely obvious that the test would fail without the change introduced by the patch.
-
Charles Davis -
Erich Hoover -
Henri Verbeet