Sean Christopherson <[email protected]> writes: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, Ritesh Harjani wrote: >> "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > Hi All, >> > >> > This series primarly adds KVM selftests support for powerpc (64-bit, BookS, >> > radix MMU). >> > >> >> Hello Sean, >> >> Just wanted to check what's our plan on this one? > > At this point, I'm not going to get a pull request to Paolo before the normal > merge window. I was hoping/planning to get some early pull requests to Paolo > this cycle so y'all could build on kvm/next directly, but that didn't happen. > >> Are we planning for both PPC pre-enablement series of yours and this one to >> be taken for v7.4 merge? Do you think this can go in too? > > I'd like to get at least a subset of this series in for 7.4. If I'm reading > things correctly, all of the hacky changes I don't like are for the > kvm_create_max_vcpus_test and hardware_disable_test. And as called out in the > final patch, "fixes" for PPC really should be ordered so that they land > *before* > the tests are enabled. > > Actually, better idea. Limit patch 1 to just TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON, then for > the addon tests, bundle the "fix" with the PPC enablement. AFAICT, except for > the kvm_create_max_vcpus changes, they're all pretty small, i.e. bundling the > PPC support with the "fix" shouldn't be too painful, and then we don't have to > worry about ordering. >
Sure, will take the suggested route then. Will bundle the Makefile enablement change and the needed fix in the same patch to avoid the ordering issue. Also note - I will open code the TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON and will skip the kvm_create_max_vcpus (& maybe few others like vm_types_test) from that in v6. > As for kvm_create_max_vcpus and hardware_disable_test, drop them from the > initial > enablement so we can get the core support landed, and tackle them as separate > series post-7.4. > Sure. Will drop these two. > As for actually landing this, the easiest thing at this point would probably > be > for me to grab the patches in a dedicated topic branch that's based off the > kvm-x86/selftests branch at an appropriate point in time. Alternatively, I > could provide a stable tag and someone else could grab the patches, but other > than it being a little weird taking PPC changes through kvm-x86, that's by far > the easiest approach since I'll be sending Paolo pull requests anyways and can > explain the dependencies and whatnot. > > TL;DR: what if you post a slightly trimmed-down v6 and I take it through > kvm-x86? Sure, Thanks a lot Sean! Let me post v6 with the suggested approach. -ritesh
