Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

kvm: fix bytes_read #210

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 3, 2021
Merged

kvm: fix bytes_read #210

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 3, 2021

Conversation

Wenzel
Copy link
Owner

@Wenzel Wenzel commented Sep 3, 2021

KVM driver read_physical: bytes_read value was not updated correctly

@Wenzel Wenzel mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2021
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #210 (df02882) into master (82a329e) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #210   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   16.06%   16.06%           
=======================================
  Files          10       10           
  Lines         579      579           
  Branches       87       87           
=======================================
  Hits           93       93           
  Misses        468      468           
  Partials       18       18           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 16.06% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/driver/kvm.rs 28.57% <0.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 82a329e...df02882. Read the comment docs.

@Wenzel Wenzel merged commit bfca4a3 into master Sep 3, 2021
@Wenzel Wenzel deleted the kvm/fix_bytes_read branch September 3, 2021 10:29
@rageagainsthepc
Copy link
Collaborator

This would have been a good opportunity to add some unit tests which make sure that bytes_read is updated correctly. 😛

@Wenzel
Copy link
Owner Author

Wenzel commented Sep 4, 2021

I agree, with first integration tests are what yields most value here

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants