Hi Aditya,

One comment below.

On 23/06/26 19:49, Aditya Gupta wrote:

@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ static void test_spi_seeprom(const void *data)
     const PnvChip *chip = data;
     QTestState *qts = NULL;
     g_autofree char *tmp_path = NULL;
+    const char *machine = "powernv10";

Would it make sense to introduce `pnv_get_machine_type()` in patch 2
instead of patch 3? That would avoid hardcoding `"powernv10"` here and
allow this patch to use the helper directly.

Otherwise, the patch looks good to me.

Thanks,
Nikhil