Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi Simon, On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 12:20 AM Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Bin, > > On 4 October 2018 at 01:00, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:22 PM Simon Glass wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 27 September 2018 at 15:19, Tuomas Tynkkynen > >> wrote: > >> > Hi Simon, > >> > > >> > On 09/27/2018 04:43 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >> > ... > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? > >> >> > >> > > >> > We can switch the Travis-CI jobs for the QEMU boards to use virtio-net > >> > instead of the current network cards for the TFTP tests. I don't know > >> > if there are pytest equivalents for block devices. > >> > >> We do actually have sandbox block devices and can add anything that is > >> needed. While qemu is helpful, I much prefer tests that run with 'make > >> tests'. > > > > I had a look at the testing on sandbox. It looks to me that we need > > introduce a non-existent virtio transport sandbox emulator to support > > this. I am not sure this is worth to do so. As Tuomas mentioned we can > > setup travis-ci to test on qemu targets. > > I would like to have at least some basic testing of each uclass within > U-Boot without relying on qemu, which after all is a much more > complicated test. We have created simple sandbox drivers other > uclasses and I don't see a good reason why virtio should be different? > There are only 11 methods in the uclass so it should not be a huge > amount of work to call each one. I certainly understand the burden of > this, but I think it will pay off. > OK, will try to add a simple virtio sandbox driver to validate the API usage. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi Bin, On 4 October 2018 at 01:00, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:22 PM Simon Glass wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 27 September 2018 at 15:19, Tuomas Tynkkynen >> wrote: >> > Hi Simon, >> > >> > On 09/27/2018 04:43 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >> > ... >> >> >> >> >> >> How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? >> >> >> > >> > We can switch the Travis-CI jobs for the QEMU boards to use virtio-net >> > instead of the current network cards for the TFTP tests. I don't know >> > if there are pytest equivalents for block devices. >> >> We do actually have sandbox block devices and can add anything that is >> needed. While qemu is helpful, I much prefer tests that run with 'make >> tests'. > > I had a look at the testing on sandbox. It looks to me that we need > introduce a non-existent virtio transport sandbox emulator to support > this. I am not sure this is worth to do so. As Tuomas mentioned we can > setup travis-ci to test on qemu targets. I would like to have at least some basic testing of each uclass within U-Boot without relying on qemu, which after all is a much more complicated test. We have created simple sandbox drivers other uclasses and I don't see a good reason why virtio should be different? There are only 11 methods in the uclass so it should not be a huge amount of work to call each one. I certainly understand the burden of this, but I think it will pay off. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi Simon, On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:22 PM Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi, > > On 27 September 2018 at 15:19, Tuomas Tynkkynen > wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > > On 09/27/2018 04:43 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > ... > >> > >> > >> How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? > >> > > > > We can switch the Travis-CI jobs for the QEMU boards to use virtio-net > > instead of the current network cards for the TFTP tests. I don't know > > if there are pytest equivalents for block devices. > > We do actually have sandbox block devices and can add anything that is > needed. While qemu is helpful, I much prefer tests that run with 'make > tests'. I had a look at the testing on sandbox. It looks to me that we need introduce a non-existent virtio transport sandbox emulator to support this. I am not sure this is worth to do so. As Tuomas mentioned we can setup travis-ci to test on qemu targets. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi, On 27 September 2018 at 15:19, Tuomas Tynkkynen wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On 09/27/2018 04:43 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > ... >> >> >> How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? >> > > We can switch the Travis-CI jobs for the QEMU boards to use virtio-net > instead of the current network cards for the TFTP tests. I don't know > if there are pytest equivalents for block devices. We do actually have sandbox block devices and can add anything that is needed. While qemu is helpful, I much prefer tests that run with 'make tests'. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi Simon, On 09/27/2018 04:43 PM, Simon Glass wrote: ... How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? We can switch the Travis-CI jobs for the QEMU boards to use virtio-net instead of the current network cards for the TFTP tests. I don't know if there are pytest equivalents for block devices. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/27] virtio: Introduce VirtIO driver support
Hi Bin, On 23 September 2018 at 06:41, Bin Meng wrote: > This series brings in VirtIO driver support in U-Boot. The work is based > on Tuomas's virtio support on QEMU ARM targets. > > VirtIO is a virtualization standard for network and disk device drivers > where just the guest's device driver "knows" it is running in a virtual > environment, and cooperates with the hypervisor. This enables guests to > get high performance network and disk operations, and gives most of the > performance benefits of paravirtualization. In the U-Boot case, the > guest is U-Boot itself, while the virtual environment are normally QEMU > targets like ARM, RISC-V and x86. > > Both VirtIO MMIO and PCI transport options are supported. Only VirtIO > network and block device drivers are supported for now. > > The following QEMU targets are supported. > > - qemu_arm_defconfig > - qemu_arm64_defconfig > - qemu-riscv32_defconfig > - qemu-riscv64_defconfig > - qemu-x86_defconfig > - qemu-x86_64_defconfig > > A new child_post_probe() uclass driver method is introduced to better > support virtio device driver. This also changes BLK uclass driver to > supply a post_probe() method which calls part_init(), so that we can > avoid duplicating such call in every BLK driver. > > Not every checkpatch warning reported was fixed, but I tried to fix as > many as possible which makes sense. > > This series needs to be applied after the risc-v QEMU series is applied. > > This series is available at u-boot-x86/virtio-working for testing. > Note the branch already contains the risc-v QEMU series plus one network > stack fix to make virtio-net driver happy. > Looks like a very nice implementation. How does this all get tested? Could we have a simple sandbox driver? Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
