Re: [RFC v5 0/7] PMEM device emulation without nfit depenency

From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Santosh Sivaraj <santosh@fossix.org>
Cc: Linux NVDIMM <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>,
	Shivaprasad G Bhat <sbhat@linux.ibm.com>,
	Harish Sriram <harish@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 0/7] PMEM device emulation without nfit depenency
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 15:21:40 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4iDGN8Z=uXHrgo8Zs=Br6xbsmZsJ6VAcQVZXd=d9Nkoew@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201214103859.2409175-1-santosh@fossix.org>

Typically RFC means "not ready to apply, still seeking fundamental
approach feedback". Should I be looking to consider this for
v5.11-rc1, or is this still RFC / should wait for v5.12?

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:39 AM Santosh Sivaraj <santosh@fossix.org> wrote:
>
> The current test module cannot be used for testing platforms (make check)
> that do not have support for NFIT. In order to get the ndctl tests working,
> we need a module which can emulate NVDIMM devices without relying on
> ACPI/NFIT.
>
> The emulated PMEM device is made part of the PAPR family.
>
> Corresponding changes for ndctl is also required, to add attributes needed
> for the test, which will be sent as a reply to this patch.
>
> The following is the test result, run on a x86 guest:
>
> PASS: libndctl
> PASS: dsm-fail
> PASS: dpa-alloc
> PASS: parent-uuid
> PASS: multi-pmem
> PASS: create.sh
> FAIL: clear.sh
> FAIL: pmem-errors.sh
> FAIL: daxdev-errors.sh
> PASS: multi-dax.sh
> PASS: btt-check.sh
> FAIL: label-compat.sh
> PASS: blk-exhaust.sh
> PASS: sector-mode.sh
> FAIL: inject-error.sh
> SKIP: btt-errors.sh
> PASS: hugetlb
> PASS: btt-pad-compat.sh
> SKIP: firmware-update.sh
> FAIL: ack-shutdown-count-set
> PASS: rescan-partitions.sh
> FAIL: inject-smart.sh
> FAIL: monitor.sh
> PASS: max_available_extent_ns.sh
> FAIL: pfn-meta-errors.sh
> PASS: track-uuid.sh
> ============================================================================
> Testsuite summary for ndctl 70.10.g7ecd11c
> ============================================================================
> # TOTAL: 26
> # PASS:  15
> # SKIP:  2
> # XFAIL: 0
> # FAIL:  9
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0
>
> The following is the test result from a PowerPC 64 guest.
>
> PASS: libndctl
> PASS: dsm-fail
> PASS: dpa-alloc
> PASS: parent-uuid
> PASS: multi-pmem
> PASS: create.sh
> FAIL: clear.sh
> FAIL: pmem-errors.sh
> FAIL: daxdev-errors.sh
> PASS: multi-dax.sh
> PASS: btt-check.sh
> FAIL: label-compat.sh
> PASS: blk-exhaust.sh
> PASS: sector-mode.sh
> FAIL: inject-error.sh
> SKIP: btt-errors.sh
> SKIP: hugetlb
> PASS: btt-pad-compat.sh
> SKIP: firmware-update.sh
> FAIL: ack-shutdown-count-set
> PASS: rescan-partitions.sh
> FAIL: inject-smart.sh
> FAIL: monitor.sh
> PASS: max_available_extent_ns.sh
> FAIL: pfn-meta-errors.sh
> PASS: track-uuid.sh
> ============================================================================
> Testsuite summary for ndctl 70.git94a00679
> ============================================================================
> # TOTAL: 26
> # PASS:  14
> # SKIP:  3
> # XFAIL: 0
> # FAIL:  9
> # XPASS: 0
> # ERROR: 0

With these run reports are you trying to demonstrate the improvement,
or the future work?

I think it's sufficient to say that no tests ran with nfit_test
previously, but now 26 pass. Extra interesting would be to determine
if any current papr regression fixes in the tree would have been
caught by an ndtest run.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org