From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E673C2D0EB for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 10:44:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFACA20716 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 10:44:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EFACA20716 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A87F4B265; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:44:00 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Ty2if6pavRp; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:43:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FB6D4B270; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:43:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F36804B1AF for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:43:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39z0gWAA0Jk9 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:43:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from huawei.com (szxga06-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.32]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 114094B134 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:43:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C80DCD5780820CED5358; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 18:43:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.173.222.27) by DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 18:43:38 +0800 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v7 10/13] arm/arm64: ITS: INT functional tests To: Eric Auger References: <20200320092428.20880-1-eric.auger@redhat.com> <20200320092428.20880-11-eric.auger@redhat.com> From: Zenghui Yu Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 18:43:37 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200320092428.20880-11-eric.auger@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.173.222.27] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, andre.przywara@arm.com, thuth@redhat.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, eric.auger.pro@gmail.com X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Hi Eric, On 2020/3/20 17:24, Eric Auger wrote: > Triggers LPIs through the INT command. > > the test checks the LPI hits the right CPU and triggers > the right LPI intid, ie. the translation is correct. > > Updates to the config table also are tested, along with inv > and invall commands. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Auger [...] So I've tested this series and found that the "INT" test will sometimes fail. "not ok 12 - gicv3: its-migration: dev2/eventid=20 triggers LPI 8195 en PE #3 after migration not ok 13 - gicv3: its-migration: dev7/eventid=255 triggers LPI 8196 on PE #2 after migration" From logs: "INFO: gicv3: its-migration: Migration complete INT dev_id=2 event_id=20 INFO: gicv3: its-migration: No LPI received whereas (cpuid=3, intid=8195) was expected FAIL: gicv3: its-migration: dev2/eventid=20 triggers LPI 8195 en PE #3 after migration INT dev_id=7 event_id=255 INFO: gicv3: its-migration: No LPI received whereas (cpuid=2, intid=8196) was expected FAIL: gicv3: its-migration: dev7/eventid=255 triggers LPI 8196 on PE #2 after migration" > +static void check_lpi_stats(const char *msg) > +{ > + bool pass = false; > + > + mdelay(100); After changing this to 'mdelay(1000)', the above error doesn't show up anymore. But it sounds strange that 100ms is not enough to deliver a single LPI. I haven't dig it further but will get back here later. > + smp_rmb(); /* pairs with wmb in lpi_handler */ > + if (lpi_stats.observed.cpu_id != lpi_stats.expected.cpu_id || > + lpi_stats.observed.lpi_id != lpi_stats.expected.lpi_id) { > + if (lpi_stats.observed.cpu_id == -1 && > + lpi_stats.observed.lpi_id == -1) { > + report_info("No LPI received whereas (cpuid=%d, intid=%d) " > + "was expected", lpi_stats.expected.cpu_id, > + lpi_stats.expected.lpi_id); > + } else { > + report_info("Unexpected LPI (cpuid=%d, intid=%d)", > + lpi_stats.observed.cpu_id, > + lpi_stats.observed.lpi_id); > + } > + } else { > + pass = true; > + } > + report(pass, "%s", msg); > +} This patch itself looks good to me, Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu Thanks _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm