[kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 0/3] GIC ITS tests

[Alex Bennée]

Andrew Jones <drjones at redhat.com> writes:

> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 04:30:47PM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> 
>> Andrew Jones <drjones at redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 02:08:01PM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Andrew Jones <drjones at redhat.com> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 11:47:31AM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Sorry this has been sitting in my tree so long. The changes are fairly
>> >> >> minor from v2. I no longer split the tests up into TCG and KVM
>> >> >> versions and instead just ensure that ERRATA_FORCE is always set when
>> >> >> run under TCG.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Alex Bennée (3):
>> >> >>   arm64: remove invalid check from its-trigger test
>> >> >>   arm64: enable its-migration tests for TCG
>> >> >>   arch-run: do not process ERRATA when running under TCG
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>  scripts/arch-run.bash |  4 +++-
>> >> >>  arm/gic.c             | 16 ++++++----------
>> >> >>  arm/unittests.cfg     |  3 ---
>> >> >>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> 2.30.2
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> kvmarm mailing list
>> >> >> kvmarm at lists.cs.columbia.edu
>> >> >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Alex,
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for this. I've applied to arm/queue, but I see that
>> >> >
>> >> > FAIL: gicv3: its-trigger: inv/invall: dev2/eventid=20 pending LPI is received
>> >> >
>> >> > consistently fails for me. Is that expected? Does it work for you?
>> >> 
>> >> doh - looks like I cocked up the merge conflict...
>> >> 
>> >> Did it fail for TCG or for KVM (or both)?
>> >
>> > Just TCG, which was why I was wondering if it was expected. I've never run
>> > these tests with TCG before.
>> 
>> Hmm I think expecting the IRQ at all is broken so I think I should
>> delete the whole pending test.
>
> Feel free to repost. I'll update the patches in arm/queue before my next
> MR.

Actually I think the problem was with a regression in the TCG ITS
support (now fixed in master). So I believe as of v3 everything is
correct (and v4 should be ignored).

Are you happy to apply this series or do you want me to repost it as v5?

>
> Thanks,
> drew


-- 
Alex Bennée