Downgrade auto testing testing to a nice-to-have
Automatic testing of our testing is not essential, as our testing
framework may be manually tested. Having automated tests to test our
tests may be left to future work.
Signed-off-by: David Horstmann <david.horstmann@arm.com>
diff --git a/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md b/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md
index 385f48f..01b42b0 100644
--- a/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md
+++ b/docs/architecture/psa-shared-memory.md
@@ -599,9 +599,11 @@
#### Validation of validation for copying
-To make sure that we can correctly detect functions that access their input/output buffers rather than the copies, it is necessary to write a test function that misbehaves and test it with memory poisoning. Specifically, the function should:
+To make sure that we can correctly detect functions that access their input/output buffers rather than the copies, it would be best to write a test function that misbehaves and test it with memory poisoning. Specifically, the function should:
* Read its input buffer and after calling the input-buffer-copying function to create a local copy of its input.
* Write to its output buffer before and after calling the output-buffer-copying function to copy-back its output.
-Then, write a test that uses this function with memory poisoning and ensure that it fails. Since we are expecting a failure due to memory-poisoning, run this test separately from the rest of the memory-poisoning testing.
+Then, we could write a test that uses this function with memory poisoning and ensure that it fails. Since we are expecting a failure due to memory-poisoning, we would run this test separately from the rest of the memory-poisoning testing.
+
+However, performing this testing automatically is not urgent. It will suffice to manually verify that the test framework works, automatic tests are a 'nice to have' feature that may be left to future work.