Re: [PATCH V6 00/24] IOREQ feature (+ virtio-mmio) on Arm

From: Oleksandr <olekstysh@gmail.com>
To: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>, Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org>
Cc: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com>, "Wei Chen" <Wei.Chen@arm.com>,
	"Oleksandr Tyshchenko" <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>,
	"Paul Durrant" <paul@xen.org>,
	"Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>, "Wei Liu" <wl@xen.org>,
	"Julien Grall" <Julien.Grall@arm.com>,
	"George Dunlap" <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	"Jun Nakajima" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
	"Kevin Tian" <kevin.tian@intel.com>, "Tim Deegan" <tim@xen.org>,
	"Daniel De Graaf" <dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov>,
	"Volodymyr Babchuk" <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>,
	"Bertrand Marquis" <Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com>,
	"Kaly Xin" <Kaly.Xin@arm.com>,
	"Artem Mygaiev" <joculator@gmail.com>,
	"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 00/24] IOREQ feature (+ virtio-mmio) on Arm
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 18:22:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ce25846-63c2-4326-dc96-3c9e7f295781@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fd7f1289-04a1-0f50-fdaa-841ef1fcbbcf@xen.org>

On 29.01.21 18:06, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Oleksandr,

Hi Julien, Ian

>
> On 29/01/2021 11:06, Oleksandr wrote:
>> On 29.01.21 12:51, Oleksandr wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29.01.21 10:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jan
>>>
>>>> On 29.01.2021 09:13, Wei Chen wrote:
>>>>> I just tested the v6 and the latest backend service with the 
>>>>> latest staging branch.
>>>>> They work well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested-by: Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@arm.com>
>>>> An faod this was again Arm-only testing?
>>> Yes, unfortunately I don't have a possibility to test on x86, if I 
>>> had I would definitely perform testing.
>>> I performed code analysis (the diff between V5 and V6 is small 
>>> enough and these changes unlikely will add regression, so I was 
>>> thinking that if basic x86 test passed on V5 (thanks to Julien) than 
>>> it would likely pass on V6 as well),
>>> but please don't get me wrong, I *completely* agree that even an 
>>> obvious single patch must be tested.
>>>
>>>
>> What worries me the most is:
>>
>>  >>> Unfortunately, I don't have a Windows VM in hand, so I can't 
>> confirm if
>>  >>> there is no regression there. Can anyone give a try?
>>
>> I am sorry, but would it be possible to make sure that current series 
>> doesn't break that use-case? Or this could be tested (and fixed if 
>> there is a need) after the feature freeze?
> With Ian's help, I used Osstest to run a Windows job with your branch 
> (see [1]).
>
> The branch used is rebase version because there was a building issue 
> with Mini-OS on your baseline (it is already fixed upstream).
>
> The result are the same as the latest run with staging (see [2]). So 
> there is no regression with your series applied!

Sounds great, thank you, I really appreciate your help!

>
> I will go through the series one last time and then commit it.

Thank you!

>
> Cheers,
>
> [1] http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/158785/
> [2] 
> http://logs.test-lab.xenproject.org/osstest/logs/158719/test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-win7-amd64/info.html
>
>
>>
>>
>
-- 
Regards,

Oleksandr Tyshchenko