[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJve8onvmDtD_GsbkUChzf6Sbt37FpfNvWEd+rJr7F1NxfjnCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 10:01:05 +0800
From: Haibo Xu <xiaobo55x@...il.com>
To: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Haibo Xu <haibo1.xu@...el.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>,
Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@...gle.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@...ux.dev>,
Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] RISCV: Add kvm Sstc timer selftest
On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 5:57 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 09:37:36AM +0800, Haibo Xu wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:14 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023, Haibo Xu wrote:
> > > > The sstc_timer selftest is used to validate Sstc timer functionality
> > > > in a guest, which sets up periodic timer interrupts and check the
> > > > basic interrupt status upon its receipt.
> > > >
> > > > This KVM selftest was ported from aarch64 arch_timer and tested
> > > > with Linux v6.5-rc3 on a Qemu riscv64 virt machine.
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to extract the ARM bits from arch_timer and make the bulk of
> > > the test common to ARM and RISC-V? At a glance, there is quite a bit of copy+paste.
> >
> > Sure, I will have a try to consolidate the common code for ARM and RISC-V in v2.
> >
>
> Yes, afaict, we should be able to make aarch64/arch_timer.c another "split
> test", like we did for aarch64/get-reg-list.c, but before we do that, I'd
> like to get an ack from the Arm maintainers on the get-reg-list split to
> be sure that approach is acceptable.
>
Yes, we can re-use the split method.
Since there is less configuration data that should be handled, I think
it may be
easier for the timer test to consolidate the code, since most of the
operations
can be overloaded for different ARCH.
I'll have a try and send the v2 soon!
Thanks!
> Thanks,
> drew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists