[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c4adbfcd-1c5a-3f7a-7d61-206964256963@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 12:01:46 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@...hat.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/kvm: add set_boot_cpu_id test
On 17/03/21 08:44, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> + printf("vcpu executing...\n");
> + vcpu_run(vm, vcpuid);
> + printf("vcpu executed\n");
> +
> + switch (get_ucall(vm, vcpuid, &uc)) {
> + case UCALL_SYNC:
> + printf("stage %d sync %ld\n", stage, uc.args[1]);
> + TEST_ASSERT(!strcmp((const char *)uc.args[0], "hello") &&
> + uc.args[1] == stage + 1,
> + "Stage %d: Unexpected register values vmexit, got %lx",
> + stage + 1, (ulong)uc.args[1]);
> + return;
> + case UCALL_DONE:
> + printf("got done\n");
You can remove the printfs here.
> + return;
> + case UCALL_ABORT:
> + TEST_ASSERT(false, "%s at %s:%ld\n\tvalues: %#lx, %#lx", (const char *)uc.args[0],
> + __FILE__, uc.args[1], uc.args[2], uc.args[3]);
> + default:
> + TEST_ASSERT(false, "Unexpected exit: %s",
> + exit_reason_str(vcpu_state(vm, vcpuid)->exit_reason));
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static void add_x86_vcpu(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid, void *code)
> +{
> + vm_vcpu_add_default(vm, vcpuid, code);
> + vcpu_set_cpuid(vm, vcpuid, kvm_get_supported_cpuid());
> +}
> +
> +static void run_vm_bsp(uint32_t bsp_vcpu)
> +{
> + struct kvm_vm *vm;
> + int stage;
> + void *vcpu0_code, *vcpu1_code;
> +
> + vm = create_vm();
> +
> + vcpu0_code = guest_bsp_vcpu;
> + vcpu1_code = guest_not_bsp_vcpu;
> +
> + if (bsp_vcpu == VCPU_ID1) {
> + vcpu0_code = guest_not_bsp_vcpu;
> + vcpu1_code = guest_bsp_vcpu;
> +
> + vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_SET_BOOT_CPU_ID, (void *) VCPU_ID1);
> + }
> +
> + add_x86_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID0, vcpu0_code);
> + add_x86_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID1, vcpu1_code);
> +
> + for (stage = 0; stage < 2; stage++) {
> + run_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID0, stage);
> + run_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID1, stage);
> + }
These are just stylistic nits, but:
1) you could pass a bool to add_x86_vcpu, like
add_x86_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID0, bsp_vcpu == VCPU_ID0);
add_x86_vcpu(vm, VCPU_ID1, bsp_vcpu == VCPU_ID1);
instead of having the vcpu0_code and vcpu1_code pointers.
2) you could move the for loop inside run_vcpu. This way you can assert
that you get UCALL_DONE when stage == 2.
> + kvm_vm_free(vm);
> +}
> +
> +int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> + if (!kvm_check_cap(KVM_CAP_SET_BOOT_CPU_ID)) {
> + print_skip("set_boot_cpu_id not available");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + run_vm_bsp(VCPU_ID0);
> + run_vm_bsp(VCPU_ID1);
> + run_vm_bsp(VCPU_ID0);
Looks good! Just another small change: since this third test is not
adding much, you could instead invoke KVM_SET_BOOT_CPU_ID(VCPU_ID1)
*after* the creation of the vCPUs instead of before. This should fail
with -EBUSY, and vcpu 0 will remain the BSP.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists