Hi Drew, On 2/7/20 3:06 PM, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 11:34:59AM +0100, Eric Auger wrote: >> Add two new migration tests. One testing the migration of >> a topology where collection were unmapped. The second test >> checks the migration of the pending table. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com> >> >> --- >> >> v2 -> v3: >> - tests belong to both its and migration groups >> --- >> arm/gic.c | 150 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> arm/unittests.cfg | 16 +++++ >> 2 files changed, 166 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arm/gic.c b/arm/gic.c >> index fa8626a..ec3dd3a 100644 >> --- a/arm/gic.c >> +++ b/arm/gic.c >> @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ static void lpi_handler(struct pt_regs *regs __unused) >> smp_rmb(); /* pairs with wmb in lpi_stats_expect */ >> lpi_stats.observed.cpu_id = smp_processor_id(); >> lpi_stats.observed.lpi_id = irqnr; >> + acked[lpi_stats.observed.cpu_id]++; >> smp_wmb(); /* pairs with rmb in check_lpi_stats */ >> } >> >> @@ -239,6 +240,18 @@ static void secondary_lpi_test(void) >> while (1) >> wfi(); >> } >> + >> +static void check_lpi_hits(int *expected) >> +{ >> + int i; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++) { >> + if (acked[i] != expected[i]) >> + report(false, "expected %d LPIs on PE #%d, %d observed", >> + expected[i], i, acked[i]); > > report_info > pass = false > >> + } >> + report(true, "check LPI on all vcpus"); > > report(pass, ...); I still don't get the issue. > >> +} >> #endif >> >> static void gicv2_ipi_send_self(void) >> @@ -594,6 +607,8 @@ static void gic_test_mmio(void) >> static void test_its_introspection(void) {} >> static void test_its_trigger(void) {} >> static void test_its_migration(void) {} >> +static void test_migrate_unmapped_collection(void) {} >> +static void test_its_pending_migration(void) {} > > I'm not sure what's worse. This pile of stubs or one #ifdef in main() > wrapping all the calls. Those stubs now are in the arm header. > >> >> #else /* __arch64__ */ >> >> @@ -666,6 +681,18 @@ static bool its_prerequisites(int nb_cpus) >> return false; >> } >> >> +static void set_lpi(struct its_device *dev, u32 eventid, u32 physid, >> + struct its_collection *col) >> +{ >> + if (!dev || !col) > > I don't think col can be null, and this doesn't look like the right place > to check if dev is null. If we're bothiner to call set_lpi, then I > think we should already expect dev to be good to go. put an assert() instead > >> + report_abort("wrong device or collection"); >> + >> + its_send_mapti(dev, physid, eventid, col); >> + >> + gicv3_lpi_set_config(physid, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT); >> + its_send_invall(col); >> +} >> + >> /* >> * Setup the configuration for those mappings: >> * dev_id=2 event=20 -> vcpu 3, intid=8195 >> @@ -806,6 +833,121 @@ static void test_its_migration(void) >> its_send_int(dev7, 255); >> check_lpi_stats(); >> } >> + >> +static void test_migrate_unmapped_collection(void) >> +{ >> + struct its_collection *col; >> + struct its_device *dev2, *dev7; >> + u8 config; >> + >> + if (its_setup1()) >> + return; >> + >> + col = its_create_collection(nr_cpus - 1, nr_cpus - 1); >> + dev2 = its_get_device(2); >> + dev7 = its_get_device(7); >> + >> + /* MAPTI with the collection unmapped */ >> + set_lpi(dev2, 0, 8192, col); >> + >> + puts("Now migrate the VM, then press a key to continue...\n"); >> + (void)getchar(); >> + report(true, "Migration complete"); > > report_info yep > >> + >> + /* on the destination, map the collection */ >> + its_send_mapc(col, true); >> + >> + lpi_stats_expect(2, 8196); >> + its_send_int(dev7, 255); >> + check_lpi_stats(); >> + >> + config = gicv3_lpi_get_config(8192); >> + report(config == LPI_PROP_DEFAULT, >> + "Config of LPI 8192 was properly migrated"); >> + >> + lpi_stats_expect(nr_cpus - 1, 8192); >> + its_send_int(dev2, 0); >> + check_lpi_stats(); >> + >> + /* unmap the collection */ >> + its_send_mapc(col, false); >> + >> + lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1); >> + its_send_int(dev2, 0); >> + check_lpi_stats(); >> + >> + /* remap event 0 onto lpiid 8193 */ >> + set_lpi(dev2, 0, 8193, col); >> + lpi_stats_expect(-1, -1); >> + its_send_int(dev2, 0); >> + check_lpi_stats(); >> + >> + /* remap the collection */ >> + its_send_mapc(col, true); >> + lpi_stats_expect(nr_cpus - 1, 8193); >> +} >> + >> +static void test_its_pending_migration(void) >> +{ >> + struct its_device *dev; >> + struct its_collection *collection[2]; >> + int expected[NR_CPUS]; > > expected = malloc(nr_cpus * sizeof(int)); > > I know there are other places using NR_CPUS right now that don't have to, > but we shouldn't add more. Eventually I'll change the other places too. OK > >> + u64 pendbaser; >> + void *ptr; >> + int i; >> + >> + if (its_prerequisites(4)) >> + return; >> + >> + dev = its_create_device(2 /* dev id */, 8 /* nb_ites */); >> + its_send_mapd(dev, true); >> + >> + collection[0] = its_create_collection(nr_cpus - 1, nr_cpus - 1); >> + collection[1] = its_create_collection(nr_cpus - 2, nr_cpus - 2); >> + its_send_mapc(collection[0], true); >> + its_send_mapc(collection[1], true); >> + >> + /* disable lpi at redist level */ >> + gicv3_lpi_rdist_ctrl(nr_cpus - 1, false); >> + gicv3_lpi_rdist_ctrl(nr_cpus - 2, false); >> + >> + /* even lpis are assigned to even cpu */ >> + for (i = 0; i < 256; i++) { >> + struct its_collection *col = i % 2 ? collection[0] : >> + collection[1]; >> + int vcpu = col->target_address >> 16; > > I'm lost with the even/odd (nr_cpus - 1)/(nr_cpus - 2) stuff, and won't > it swap if nr_cpus is odd vs. even? > > Shouldn't we just have something like > > pe1 = nr_cpus - 1; > pe2 = nr_cpus - 2; > col1 = its_create_collection(pe1, pe1); > col2 = its_create_collection(pe2, pe2); > > without mentioning even and odd? OK > >> + >> + its_send_mapti(dev, 8192 + i, i, col); >> + gicv3_lpi_set_config(8192 + i, LPI_PROP_DEFAULT); >> + gicv3_lpi_set_pending_table_bit(vcpu, 8192 + i, true); >> + } >> + its_send_invall(collection[0]); >> + its_send_invall(collection[1]); >> + >> + /* Set the PTZ bit on each pendbaser */ >> + >> + expected[nr_cpus - 1] = 128; >> + expected[nr_cpus - 2] = 128; >> + >> + ptr = gicv3_data.redist_base[nr_cpus - 1] + GICR_PENDBASER; >> + pendbaser = readq(ptr); >> + writeq(pendbaser & ~GICR_PENDBASER_PTZ, ptr); >> + >> + ptr = gicv3_data.redist_base[nr_cpus - 2] + GICR_PENDBASER; >> + pendbaser = readq(ptr); >> + writeq(pendbaser & ~GICR_PENDBASER_PTZ, ptr); >> + >> + gicv3_lpi_rdist_ctrl(nr_cpus - 1, true); >> + gicv3_lpi_rdist_ctrl(nr_cpus - 2, true); >> + >> + puts("Now migrate the VM, then press a key to continue...\n"); >> + (void)getchar(); >> + report(true, "Migration complete"); > > report_info OK > >> + >> + mdelay(1000); > > This delay needs a comment explaining why it's here. OK
Thanks Eric > >> + >> + check_lpi_hits(expected); >> +} >> #endif >> >> int main(int argc, char **argv) >> @@ -847,6 +989,14 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) >> report_prefix_push(argv[1]); >> test_its_migration(); >> report_prefix_pop(); >> + } else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "its-pending-migration")) { >> + report_prefix_push(argv[1]); >> + test_its_pending_migration(); >> + report_prefix_pop(); >> + } else if (!strcmp(argv[1], "its-migrate-unmapped-collection")) { >> + report_prefix_push(argv[1]); >> + test_migrate_unmapped_collection(); >> + report_prefix_pop(); >> } else if (strcmp(argv[1], "its-introspection") == 0) { >> report_prefix_push(argv[1]); >> test_its_introspection(); >> diff --git a/arm/unittests.cfg b/arm/unittests.cfg >> index 8b8ec79..d917157 100644 >> --- a/arm/unittests.cfg >> +++ b/arm/unittests.cfg >> @@ -144,6 +144,22 @@ extra_params = -machine gic-version=3 -append >> 'its-migration' >> groups = its migration >> arch = arm64 >> >> +[its-pending-migration] >> +file = gic.flat >> +smp = $MAX_SMP >> +accel = kvm >> +extra_params = -machine gic-version=3 -append 'its-pending-migration' >> +groups = its migration >> +arch = arm64 >> + >> +[its-migrate-unmapped-collection] >> +file = gic.flat >> +smp = $MAX_SMP >> +accel = kvm >> +extra_params = -machine gic-version=3 -append >> 'its-migrate-unmapped-collection' >> +groups = its migration >> +arch = arm64 >> + >> # Test PSCI emulation >> [psci] >> file = psci.flat >> -- >> 2.20.1 >> >> > > Thanks, > drew > _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm