On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 17:56:11 +0530 Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 02:43:52PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 03:46:36 -0400 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 03:50:10PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 13:51:04 +0100 > > > > Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 02:43:19PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 8 Jul 2024 17:17:32 +0530 > > > > > > Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > This series adds few updates to RISC-V ACPI namespace for virt > > > > > > > platform. > > > > > > > Additionally, it has patches to enable ACPI table testing for > > > > > > > RISC-V. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) PCI Link devices need to be created outside the scope of the > > > > > > > PCI root > > > > > > > complex to ensure correct probe ordering by the OS. This matches > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > example given in ACPI spec as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Add PLIC and APLIC as platform devices as well to ensure > > > > > > > probing > > > > > > > order as per BRS spec [1] requirement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) BRS spec requires RISC-V to use new ACPI ID for the generic > > > > > > > UART. So, > > > > > > > update the HID of the UART. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) Enabled ACPI tables tests for RISC-V which were originally > > > > > > > part of > > > > > > > [2] but couldn't get merged due to updates required in the > > > > > > > expected AML > > > > > > > files. I think combining those patches with this series makes it > > > > > > > easier > > > > > > > to merge since expected AML files are updated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] - https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-brs > > > > > > > [2] - > > > > > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2024-06/msg04734.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > btw: CI is not happy about series, see: > > > > > > https://gitlab.com/imammedo/qemu/-/pipelines/1371119552 > > > > > > also 'cross-i686-tci' job routinely timeouts on bios-tables-test > > > > > > but we still keep adding more tests to it. > > > > > > We should either bump timeout to account for slowness or > > > > > > disable bios-tables-test for that job. > > > > > > > > > > Asumming the test is functionally correct, and not hanging, then > > > > > bumping > > > > > the timeout is the right answer. You can do this in the meson.build > > > > > file > > > > > > > > I think test is fine, since once in a while it passes (I guess it > > > > depends on runner host/load) > > > > > > > > Overal job timeout is 1h, but that's not what fails. > > > > What I see is, the test aborts after 10min timeout. > > > > it's likely we hit boot_sector_test()/acpi_find_rsdp_address_uefi() > > > > timeout. > > > > That's what we should try to bump. > > > > > > > > PS: > > > > I've just started the job with 5min bump, lets see if it is enough. > > > > > > Because we should wait for 5min CPU time, not wall time. > > > Why don't we do that? > > > Something like getrusage should work I think. > > > > > > > It turned out to be a meson timeout that's set individually per test file. > > I'll send a patch later on. > > > Hi Igor, > > I am unable to get msys2-64bit test in CI to pass. I tried including > your change in meson as well but no luck. I can't guess how enabling > bios-tables-test for RISC-V is affecting this particular test. Does this > pass for you? > > https://gitlab.com/vlsunil/qemu/-/jobs/7343701148 it doesn't pass for me either, but bios-tables-test is not among those that timed out, so I'd ignore failure in this case > > Thanks! > Sunil >
