Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 08/10] arm/arm64: gic: Split check_acked() into two functions

[Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>]

Hi Alexandru,

On 12/16/20 12:40 PM, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On 12/15/20 1:58 PM, Auger Eric wrote:
>> Hi Alexandru,
>>
>> On 12/10/20 3:45 PM, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> On 12/3/20 1:39 PM, Auger Eric wrote:
>>>> [..]
>>>>  
>>>>  static void check_spurious(void)
>>>> @@ -300,7 +318,8 @@ static void ipi_test_self(void)
>>>>  	cpumask_clear(&mask);
>>>>  	cpumask_set_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &mask);
>>>>  	gic->ipi.send_self();
>>>> -	check_acked("IPI: self", &mask);
>>>> +	wait_for_interrupts(&mask);
>>>> +	report(check_acked(&mask), "Interrupts received");
>>>>  	report_prefix_pop();
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -315,7 +334,8 @@ static void ipi_test_smp(void)
>>>>  	for (i = smp_processor_id() & 1; i < nr_cpus; i += 2)
>>>>  		cpumask_clear_cpu(i, &mask);
>>>>  	gic_ipi_send_mask(IPI_IRQ, &mask);
>>>> -	check_acked("IPI: directed", &mask);
>>>> +	wait_for_interrupts(&mask);
>>>> +	report(check_acked(&mask), "Interrupts received");
>>>> both ipi_test_smp and ipi_test_self are called from the same test so
>>>> better to use different error messages like it was done originally.
>>> I used the same error message because the tests have a different prefix
>>> ("target-list" versus "broadcast"). Do you think there are cases where that's not
>>> enough?
>> I think in "ipi" test,
>> ipi_test -> ipi_send -> ipi_test_self, ipi_test_smp
> 
> I'm afraid I don't understand what you are trying to say. This is the log for the
> gicv3-ipi test:
> 
> $ cat logs/gicv3-ipi.log
> timeout -k 1s --foreground 90s /usr/bin/qemu-system-aarch64 -nodefaults -machine
> virt,gic-version=host,accel=kvm -cpu host -device virtio-serial-device -device
> virtconsole,chardev=ctd -chardev testdev,id=ctd -device pci-testdev -display none
> -serial stdio -kernel arm/gic.flat -smp 6 -machine gic-version=3 -append ipi #
> -initrd /tmp/tmp.trk6aAcaZx
> WARNING: early print support may not work. Found uart at 0x9000000, but early base
> is 0x3f8.
> PASS: gicv3: ipi: self: Interrupts received
> PASS: gicv3: ipi: target-list: Interrupts received
> PASS: gicv3: ipi: broadcast: Interrupts received
> SUMMARY: 3 tests
> 
> The warning is because I forgot to reconfigure the tests with --vmm=qemu.
> 
> Would you mind pointing out what you think is ambiguous?
Hum sorry I did not pay attention to the report_prefix_push() within
ipi_test_self & ipi_test_smp. I had in mind those were only in the main().

Forgive me for the noise

Eric
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex
>