>-Original Message-
>From: Thomas Huth
>Subject: Re: [PATCH rfcv2 17/17] tests/qtest: Add intel-iommu test
>
>On 22/05/2024 08.23, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> Add the framework to test the intel-iommu device.
>>
>> Currently only tested cap/ecap bits correctness in scalable
>> modern mode. Also tested cap/ecap bits consistency before
>> and after system reset.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan
>> ---
>> MAINTAINERS| 1 +
>> tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c | 63
>++
>> tests/qtest/meson.build| 1 +
>> 3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c
>>
>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>> index 5dab60bd04..f1ef6128c8 100644
>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -3656,6 +3656,7 @@ S: Supported
>> F: hw/i386/intel_iommu.c
>> F: hw/i386/intel_iommu_internal.h
>> F: include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h
>> +F: tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c
>>
>> AMD-Vi Emulation
>> S: Orphan
>> diff --git a/tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c b/tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00..e1273bce14
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tests/qtest/intel-iommu-test.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
>> +/*
>> + * QTest testcase for intel-iommu
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (c) 2024 Intel, Inc.
>> + *
>> + * Author: Zhenzhong Duan
>> + *
>> + * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 2 or
>later.
>> + * See the COPYING file in the top-level directory.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#include "qemu/osdep.h"
>> +#include "libqtest-single.h"
>
>It's a little bit nicer to write new tests without libqtest-single.h (e.g.
>in case you ever add migration tests later, you must not use anything that
>uses a global state), so I'd recommend to use "qts = qtest_init(...)"
>instead of qtest_start(...) and then to use the functions with the "qtest_"
>prefix instead of the other functions from libqtest-single.h ... but it's
>only a recommendation, up to you whether you want to respin your patch
>with
>it or not.
Got it, I'll fix it in next version.
>
>Anyway:
>Acked-by: Thomas Huth
>
>Do you want me to pick this up through the qtest tree, or shall this go
>through some x86-related tree instead?
This patch depends on other functional patches in this series,
So maybe going through x86-related tree with others is better.
Thanks
Zhenzhong
