On 5/27/21 9:03 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
We should never be trying to run most of these models under a KVM
environment.
Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <[email protected]>
---
tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py
b/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py
index 276a53f146..cded547d1d 100644
--- a/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py
+++ b/tests/acceptance/boot_linux_console.py
@@ -333,6 +333,7 @@ def test_aarch64_virt(self):
"""
:avocado: tags=arch:aarch64
:avocado: tags=machine:virt
+ :avocado: tags=accel:tcg
"""
kernel_url = ('https://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora'
'/linux/releases/29/Everything/aarch64/os/images/pxeboot'
This one should work with kvm if we change the -cpu line, yes?
Do we have any other boot_linux_console testing for kvm otherwise?
@@ -379,6 +384,7 @@ def test_arm_virt(self):
"""
:avocado: tags=arch:arm
:avocado: tags=machine:virt
+ :avocado: tags=accel:tcg
"""
kernel_url = ('https://archives.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora'
'/linux/releases/29/Everything/armhfp/os/images/pxeboot'
Ack, because for kvm we'd have to know if the host supports 32-bit mode at all.
So, no for the thunderx2 that aarch64.ci.qemu.org has, but yes for the
cortex-a57 in my mustang.
It'd be nice to be able to detect this somehow...
Ack to all the rest as obvious arm embedded/pi stuff.
r~
