[PATCH 0/2] KVM: selftests: enable the memslot tests in ARM64

[PATCH 0/2] KVM: selftests: enable the memslot tests in ARM64

[Ricardo Koller]

Enable memslot_modification_stress_test and memslot_perf_test in ARM64
(second patch). memslot_modification_stress_test builds and runs in
aarch64 without any modification. memslot_perf_test needs some nits
regarding ucalls (first patch).

Ricardo Koller (2):
  KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent
  KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile          |  2 +
 .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

[PATCH 0/2] KVM: selftests: enable the memslot tests in ARM64

[Ricardo Koller]

Enable memslot_modification_stress_test and memslot_perf_test in ARM64
(second patch). memslot_modification_stress_test builds and runs in
aarch64 without any modification. memslot_perf_test needs some nits
regarding ucalls (first patch).

Ricardo Koller (2):
  KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent
  KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile          |  2 +
 .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

[PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Ricardo Koller]

memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
makes that check.

Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
---
 .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
index d6e381e01db7..1727f75e0c2c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
@@ -127,43 +127,54 @@ static bool verbose;
 			pr_info(__VA_ARGS__);	\
 	} while (0)
 
+static void check_mmio_access(struct vm_data *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
+{
+	TEST_ASSERT(vm->mmio_ok, "Unexpected mmio exit");
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.is_write, "Unexpected mmio read");
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.len == 8,
+		    "Unexpected exit mmio size = %u", run->mmio.len);
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.phys_addr >= vm->mmio_gpa_min &&
+		    run->mmio.phys_addr <= vm->mmio_gpa_max,
+		    "Unexpected exit mmio address = 0x%llx",
+		    run->mmio.phys_addr);
+}
+
 static void *vcpu_worker(void *data)
 {
 	struct vm_data *vm = data;
 	struct kvm_run *run;
 	struct ucall uc;
-	uint64_t cmd;
 
 	run = vcpu_state(vm->vm, VCPU_ID);
 	while (1) {
 		vcpu_run(vm->vm, VCPU_ID);
 
-		if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO) {
-			cmd = get_ucall(vm->vm, VCPU_ID, &uc);
-			if (cmd != UCALL_SYNC)
-				break;
-
+		switch (get_ucall(vm->vm, VCPU_ID, &uc)) {
+		case UCALL_SYNC:
+			TEST_ASSERT(uc.args[1] == 0,
+				"Unexpected sync ucall, got %lx",
+				(ulong)uc.args[1]);
 			sem_post(&vcpu_ready);
 			continue;
-		}
-
-		if (run->exit_reason != KVM_EXIT_MMIO)
+		case UCALL_NONE:
+			if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_MMIO)
+				check_mmio_access(vm, run);
+			else
+				goto done;
 			break;
-
-		TEST_ASSERT(vm->mmio_ok, "Unexpected mmio exit");
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.is_write, "Unexpected mmio read");
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.len == 8,
-			    "Unexpected exit mmio size = %u", run->mmio.len);
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.phys_addr >= vm->mmio_gpa_min &&
-			    run->mmio.phys_addr <= vm->mmio_gpa_max,
-			    "Unexpected exit mmio address = 0x%llx",
-			    run->mmio.phys_addr);
+		case UCALL_ABORT:
+			TEST_FAIL("%s at %s:%ld, val = %lu",
+					(const char *)uc.args[0],
+					__FILE__, uc.args[1], uc.args[2]);
+			break;
+		case UCALL_DONE:
+			goto done;
+		default:
+			TEST_FAIL("Unknown ucall %lu", uc.cmd);
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO && cmd == UCALL_ABORT)
-		TEST_FAIL("%s at %s:%ld, val = %lu", (const char *)uc.args[0],
-			  __FILE__, uc.args[1], uc.args[2]);
-
+done:
 	return NULL;
 }
 
@@ -268,6 +279,7 @@ static bool prepare_vm(struct vm_data *data, int nslots, uint64_t *maxslots,
 	TEST_ASSERT(data->hva_slots, "malloc() fail");
 
 	data->vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, mempages, guest_code);
+	ucall_init(data->vm, NULL);
 
 	pr_info_v("Adding slots 1..%i, each slot with %"PRIu64" pages + %"PRIu64" extra pages last\n",
 		max_mem_slots - 1, data->pages_per_slot, rempages);
-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

[PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Ricardo Koller]

memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
makes that check.

Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
---
 .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
index d6e381e01db7..1727f75e0c2c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
@@ -127,43 +127,54 @@ static bool verbose;
 			pr_info(__VA_ARGS__);	\
 	} while (0)
 
+static void check_mmio_access(struct vm_data *vm, struct kvm_run *run)
+{
+	TEST_ASSERT(vm->mmio_ok, "Unexpected mmio exit");
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.is_write, "Unexpected mmio read");
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.len == 8,
+		    "Unexpected exit mmio size = %u", run->mmio.len);
+	TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.phys_addr >= vm->mmio_gpa_min &&
+		    run->mmio.phys_addr <= vm->mmio_gpa_max,
+		    "Unexpected exit mmio address = 0x%llx",
+		    run->mmio.phys_addr);
+}
+
 static void *vcpu_worker(void *data)
 {
 	struct vm_data *vm = data;
 	struct kvm_run *run;
 	struct ucall uc;
-	uint64_t cmd;
 
 	run = vcpu_state(vm->vm, VCPU_ID);
 	while (1) {
 		vcpu_run(vm->vm, VCPU_ID);
 
-		if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO) {
-			cmd = get_ucall(vm->vm, VCPU_ID, &uc);
-			if (cmd != UCALL_SYNC)
-				break;
-
+		switch (get_ucall(vm->vm, VCPU_ID, &uc)) {
+		case UCALL_SYNC:
+			TEST_ASSERT(uc.args[1] == 0,
+				"Unexpected sync ucall, got %lx",
+				(ulong)uc.args[1]);
 			sem_post(&vcpu_ready);
 			continue;
-		}
-
-		if (run->exit_reason != KVM_EXIT_MMIO)
+		case UCALL_NONE:
+			if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_MMIO)
+				check_mmio_access(vm, run);
+			else
+				goto done;
 			break;
-
-		TEST_ASSERT(vm->mmio_ok, "Unexpected mmio exit");
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.is_write, "Unexpected mmio read");
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.len == 8,
-			    "Unexpected exit mmio size = %u", run->mmio.len);
-		TEST_ASSERT(run->mmio.phys_addr >= vm->mmio_gpa_min &&
-			    run->mmio.phys_addr <= vm->mmio_gpa_max,
-			    "Unexpected exit mmio address = 0x%llx",
-			    run->mmio.phys_addr);
+		case UCALL_ABORT:
+			TEST_FAIL("%s at %s:%ld, val = %lu",
+					(const char *)uc.args[0],
+					__FILE__, uc.args[1], uc.args[2]);
+			break;
+		case UCALL_DONE:
+			goto done;
+		default:
+			TEST_FAIL("Unknown ucall %lu", uc.cmd);
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (run->exit_reason == KVM_EXIT_IO && cmd == UCALL_ABORT)
-		TEST_FAIL("%s at %s:%ld, val = %lu", (const char *)uc.args[0],
-			  __FILE__, uc.args[1], uc.args[2]);
-
+done:
 	return NULL;
 }
 
@@ -268,6 +279,7 @@ static bool prepare_vm(struct vm_data *data, int nslots, uint64_t *maxslots,
 	TEST_ASSERT(data->hva_slots, "malloc() fail");
 
 	data->vm = vm_create_default(VCPU_ID, mempages, guest_code);
+	ucall_init(data->vm, NULL);
 
 	pr_info_v("Adding slots 1..%i, each slot with %"PRIu64" pages + %"PRIu64" extra pages last\n",
 		max_mem_slots - 1, data->pages_per_slot, rempages);
-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:53PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
> 
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>

Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:53PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
> 
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>

Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Maciej S. Szmigiero]

On 04.09.2021 01:11, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
> 
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>

Thanks,
Maciej

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Maciej S. Szmigiero]

On 04.09.2021 01:11, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
> 
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>

Thanks,
Maciej
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Oliver Upton]

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
>
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
>
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: make memslot_perf_test arch independent

[Oliver Upton]

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
>
> memslot_perf_test uses ucalls for synchronization between guest and
> host. Ucalls API is architecture independent: tests do not need know
> what kind of exit they generate on a specific arch.  More specifically,
> there is no need to check whether an exit is KVM_EXIT_IO in x86 for the
> host to know that the exit is ucall related, as get_ucall() already
> makes that check.
>
> Change memslot_perf_test to not require specifying what exit does a
> ucall generate. Also add a missing ucall_init.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  .../testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 56 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

[PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
of aarch64 selftests.

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
@@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
 
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init
-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

[PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
of aarch64 selftests.

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
@@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
 
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init
-- 
2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:54PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
>  
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init

These tests need to be added below the aarch64/* tests and in alphabetical
order.

Thanks,
drew

> -- 
> 2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Andrew Jones]

On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:54PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
>  
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
>  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init

These tests need to be added below the aarch64/* tests and in alphabetical
order.

Thanks,
drew

> -- 
> 2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog
> 

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 08:52:48AM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:54PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> > Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> > of aarch64 selftests.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
> >  
> > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
> > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init
> 
> These tests need to be added below the aarch64/* tests and in alphabetical
> order.
> 

Sure, will fix this in v2.

Thanks,
Ricardo

> Thanks,
> drew
> 
> > -- 
> > 2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog
> > 
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 08:52:48AM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 04:11:54PM -0700, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> > Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> > of aarch64 selftests.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > index 5832f510a16c..e6e88575c40b 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/Makefile
> > @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += set_memory_region_test
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += steal_time
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_x86_64 += kvm_binary_stats_test
> >  
> > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_modification_stress_test
> > +TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += memslot_perf_test
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/debug-exceptions
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/get-reg-list
> >  TEST_GEN_PROGS_aarch64 += aarch64/vgic_init
> 
> These tests need to be added below the aarch64/* tests and in alphabetical
> order.
> 

Sure, will fix this in v2.

Thanks,
Ricardo

> Thanks,
> drew
> 
> > -- 
> > 2.33.0.153.gba50c8fa24-goog
> > 
> 
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Maciej S. Szmigiero]

On 04.09.2021 01:11, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>

Thanks,
Maciej

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Maciej S. Szmigiero]

On 04.09.2021 01:11, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Maciej S. Szmigiero <maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com>

Thanks,
Maciej
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Oliver Upton]

Ricardo,

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
>
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>

There isn't anything that prevents these tests from being used for
s390x too right? Of course, we haven't anything to test on but just a
thought.

Besides Drew's comments:

Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Oliver Upton]

Ricardo,

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
>
> Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> of aarch64 selftests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>

There isn't anything that prevents these tests from being used for
s390x too right? Of course, we haven't anything to test on but just a
thought.

Besides Drew's comments:

Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:39:12AM -0500, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Ricardo,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> > of aarch64 selftests.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> 
> There isn't anything that prevents these tests from being used for
> s390x too right? Of course, we haven't anything to test on but just a
> thought.

Tbh I'm not sure. Will ask if somebody can try it in the cover letter
for v2.

Thanks,
Ricardo

> 
> Besides Drew's comments:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: build the memslot tests for arm64

[Ricardo Koller]

On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:39:12AM -0500, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Ricardo,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:12 PM Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add memslot_perf_test and memslot_modification_stress_test to the list
> > of aarch64 selftests.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
> 
> There isn't anything that prevents these tests from being used for
> s390x too right? Of course, we haven't anything to test on but just a
> thought.

Tbh I'm not sure. Will ask if somebody can try it in the cover letter
for v2.

Thanks,
Ricardo

> 
> Besides Drew's comments:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm