Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 9 Jun 2022 09:40:27 +0200
From:   Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
        Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>,
        Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        anup@brainfault.org, Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
        eric.auger@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 000/144] KVM: selftests: Overhaul APIs, purge VCPU_ID
Message-ID: <20220609074027.fntbvcgac4nroy35@gator>
References: <20220603004331.1523888-1-seanjc@google.com>
 <21570ac1-e684-7983-be00-ba8b3f43a9ee@redhat.com>
 <93b87b7b5a599c1dfa47ee025f0ae9c4@kernel.org>
 <YqEupumS/m5IArTj@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YqEupumS/m5IArTj@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 11:20:06PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 2022-06-07 16:27, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > Marc, Christian, Anup, can you please give this a go?
> > 
> > Can you please, pretty please, once and for all, kill that alias you
> > seem to have for me and  email me on an address I actually can read?
> > 
> > I can't remember how many times you emailed me on my ex @arm.com address
> > over the past 2+years...
> > 
> > The same thing probably applies to Sean, btw.
> 
> Ha!  I was wondering how my old @intel address snuck in...
> 
> On the aarch64 side, with the following tweaks, courtesy of Raghu, all tests
> pass.  I'll work these into the next version, and hopefully also learn how to
> run on aarch64 myself...
> 
> Note, the i => 0 "fix" in test_v3_typer_accesses() is a direct revert of patch 3,
> "KVM: selftests: Fix typo in vgic_init test".  I'll just drop that patch unless
> someone figures out why doing the right thing causes the test to fail.

CCing Eric for that one.

> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/vgic_init.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/vgic_init.c
> index b91ea02a8a80..66b7e9c76370 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/vgic_init.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/vgic_init.c
> @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static void test_vgic_then_vcpus(uint32_t gic_dev_type)
> 
>         /* Add the rest of the VCPUs */
>         for (i = 1; i < NR_VCPUS; ++i)
> -               vm_vcpu_add(v.vm, i, guest_code);
> +               vcpus[i] = vm_vcpu_add(v.vm, i, guest_code);
> 
>         ret = run_vcpu(vcpus[3]);
>         TEST_ASSERT(ret == -EINVAL, "dist/rdist overlap detected on 1st vcpu run");
> @@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ static void test_v3_typer_accesses(void)
>                             KVM_DEV_ARM_VGIC_CTRL_INIT, NULL);
> 
>         for (i = 0; i < NR_VCPUS ; i++) {
> -               ret = v3_redist_reg_get(v.gic_fd, i, GICR_TYPER, &val);
> +               ret = v3_redist_reg_get(v.gic_fd, 0, GICR_TYPER, &val);
>                 TEST_ASSERT(!ret && !val, "read GICR_TYPER before rdist region setting");
>         }
> 
> @@ -654,11 +654,12 @@ static void test_v3_its_region(void)
>   */
>  int test_kvm_device(uint32_t gic_dev_type)
>  {
> +       struct kvm_vcpu *vcpus[NR_VCPUS];
>         struct vm_gic v;
>         uint32_t other;
>         int ret;
> 
> -       v.vm = vm_create_with_vcpus(NR_VCPUS, guest_code, NULL);
> +       v.vm = vm_create_with_vcpus(NR_VCPUS, guest_code, vcpus);
> 
>         /* try to create a non existing KVM device */
>         ret = __kvm_test_create_device(v.vm, 0);
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c
> index b3116c151d1c..17f7ef975d5c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/get-reg-list.c
> @@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ static void run_test(struct vcpu_config *c)
> 
>         check_supported(c);
> 
> -       vm = vm_create_barebones();
> +       vm = vm_create(1);

Hmm, looks like something, somewhere for AArch64 needs improving to avoid
strangeness like this. I'll look into it after we get this series merged.

>         prepare_vcpu_init(c, &init);
>         vcpu = aarch64_vcpu_add(vm, 0, &init, NULL);
>         finalize_vcpu(vcpu, c);
> 

Thanks,
drew