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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230119212510.3938454-1-bgardon@google.com> <20230119212510.3938454-3-bgardon@google.com>
 <Y8nKerX9tDRHkFq+@google.com> <CANgfPd8B_0w39d7V+c4GnUxdqrc8qN78r8Pq0Con3Mx9WO0hkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y8qj1QS1VadgaX7A@google.com> <CAOHnOrzKBh2Cq7ZQece+6f6P5wS6gZ1R2vjEQ5=QLTy7BmUvFQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOHnOrzKBh2Cq7ZQece+6f6P5wS6gZ1R2vjEQ5=QLTy7BmUvFQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:04:04 -0800
Message-ID: <CANgfPd_B0q6uU1Be7A-QOj5_YoWi8z9g9LO63mc+=136hO5K4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: KVM: Add page splitting test
To:     Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
Cc:     David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 6:34 AM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
>
...
> > > > > +
> > > > > +     run_test(&p);
> > > >
> > > > Use for_each_guest_mode() to run against all supported guest modes.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure that would actually improve coverage. None of the page
> > > splitting behavior depends on the mode AFAICT.
> >
> > You need to use for_each_guest_mode() for the ARM case. The issue is
> > that whatever mode (guest page size and VA size) you pick might not be
> > supported by the host. So, you first to explore what's available (via
> > for_each_guest_mode()).
>
> Actually, that's fixed by using the default mode, which picks the
> first available
> mode. I would prefer to use for_each_guest_mode() though, who knows and
> something fails with some specific guest page size for some reason.

Okay, will do. I wasn't sure if we did eager page splitting on ARM, so
I was only planning on making this test for x86_64 initially, hence it
being in that directory. If ARM rolls with the same behavior, then
I'll add the for_each_mode bit and move the test up a directory.

>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ricardo
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > +
> > > > > +     return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.39.1.405.gd4c25cc71f-goog
> > > > >