[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZJymfTf+fRFnDsyW@google.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 14:30:37 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Jinrong Liang <ljr.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Aaron Lewis <aaronlewis@...gle.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Like Xu <like.xu.linux@...il.com>,
Jinrong Liang <cloudliang@...cent.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] KVM: selftests: Test gp event filters don't affect
fixed event filters
On Wed, Jun 07, 2023, Jinrong Liang wrote:
> static void __test_fixed_counter_bitmap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint8_t idx,
> uint8_t nr_fixed_counters)
> {
> @@ -881,6 +894,25 @@ static void __test_fixed_counter_bitmap(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint8_t idx,
> bitmap);
> TEST_ASSERT(!!count == !(bitmap & BIT(idx)),
> "Fixed event filter does not work as expected.");
> +
> + /*
> + * Check that setting both events[] and fixed_counter_bitmap
> + * does not affect the consistency of the fixed ctrs' behaviour.
Spell out "counters". And this isn't about "consistency", the fixed_counter_bitmap
should straight up win, i.e.
/*
* Check that fixed_counter_bitmap has higher priority than
* events[] when both are set.
*/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists