From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests] arm: Add PL031 test
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:52:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c88eb2e-b401-42c7-f04f-2162f26af32c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1537a9f2-9d23-97dd-b195-8239b263d5db@amazon.com>
On 11/07/19 07:49, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> I agree that it would belong more in qtest, but tests in not exactly the
>> right place is better than no tests.
>
> The problem with qtest is that it tests QEMU device models from a QEMU
> internal view.
Not really: fundamentally it tests QEMU device models with stimuli that
come from another process in the host, rather than code that runs in a
guest. It does have hooks into QEMU's internal view (mostly to
intercept interrupts and advance the clocks), but the main feature of
the protocol is the ability to do memory reads and writes.
> I am much more interested in the guest visible side of things. If
> kvmtool wanted to implement a PL031, it should be able to execute the
> same test that we run against QEMU, no?
Well, kvmtool could also implement the qtest protocol; perhaps it should
(probably as a different executable that shares the device models with
the main kvmtool executable). There would still be issues in reusing
code from the QEMU tests, since it has references to QEMU command line
options.
> If kvm-unit-test is the wrong place for it, we would probably want to
> have a separate testing framework for guest side unit tests targeting
> emulated devices.
>
> Given how nice the kvm-unit-test framework is though, I'd rather rename
> it to "virt-unit-test" than reinvent the wheel :).
Definitely, or even just "hwtest". :) With my QEMU hat I would prefer
the test to be a qtest, but with my kvm-unit-tests hat on I see no
reason to reject this test. Sorry if this was not clear.
Paolo
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-11 7:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-10 13:27 [PATCH kvm-unit-tests] arm: Add PL031 test Alexander Graf
2019-07-10 14:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-07-12 8:29 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-12 8:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-07-10 14:37 ` Alexandru Elisei
2019-07-10 17:02 ` Andre Przywara
2019-07-10 17:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-07-11 5:49 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 7:52 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2019-07-11 9:42 ` Andre Przywara
2019-07-11 9:52 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-07-11 9:59 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 8:51 ` Peter Maydell
2019-07-11 9:11 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 9:13 ` Peter Maydell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8c88eb2e-b401-42c7-f04f-2162f26af32c@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).