Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> 于2019年4月25日周四 下午5:57写道：
> On 24/04/2019 16.06, Li Qiang wrote: > > In the disscuss of adding reboot timeout test case: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-04/msg03304.html > > > > Philippe suggested we should uses the only related option for one > > specific test. However currently we uses one QTestState for all the > > test cases. In order to achieve Philippe's idea, I split the test case > > for its own QTestState. As this patchset has changed a lot, I don't bump > > the version. > > > > Change since v1: > > Add a patch to store the reboot_timeout as little endian > > Fix the endian issue per Thomas's review > > The test still aborts on a big endian host: > > $ QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 tests/fw_cfg-test > /x86_64/fw_cfg/signature: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/id: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/uuid: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/ram_size: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/nographic: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/nb_cpus: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/max_cpus: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/numa: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/boot_menu: OK > /x86_64/fw_cfg/reboot_timeout: ** > > ERROR:/home/thuth/devel/qemu/tests/fw_cfg-test.c:190:test_fw_cfg_reboot_timeout: > assertion failed (reboot_timeout == 15): (251658240 == 15) > Aborted > > 251658240 is 0x0F000000, i.e. a byte-swapped 0xf = 15 ... i.e. you still > got an endianess issue somewhere in the code. > Hmmmm, I have thought a long time, still can't point where is wrong. Let's from the result: 0x0f000000 in the big endian laid as this: low ---> high 0x0f 00 00 00 As I have swapped before the compare so it is read as this: low ---> high 00 00 00 0x0f However from the store side: the 15 in big endian is: low ---> high 00 00 00 0x0f But Before I store it, I convert it to little endian, so following should be stored: low ---> high 0x0f 00 00 00 Do you apply the patch 3 and recompile the qemu binary? If it is, I may need your help as I have no big endian host device. You can debug and inspect the memory layout and point out where is wrong. Thanks, Li Qiang > > Thomas >
