Re: [PATCH v2 16/16] tests/functional: add tuxrun kvm gdb test for s390x

["Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>]

Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> writes:

> On 10/12/26 19:03, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> As with x86_64 we now have the bits to add a KVM gdb test. One minor
>> wrinkle is the s390x only supports WP_WRITE watch points so we skip
>> the other watch point tests lest we get confusing messages about
>> failing to insert HW breakpoints.
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   tests/functional/gdb-scripts/kernel_gdb_test.py | 10 ++++++----
>>   tests/functional/s390x/test_tuxrun.py           | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>   2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/tests/functional/gdb-scripts/kernel_gdb_test.py
>> b/tests/functional/gdb-scripts/kernel_gdb_test.py
>> index 2d62fe01f10..56f0514c943 100644
>> --- a/tests/functional/gdb-scripts/kernel_gdb_test.py
>> +++ b/tests/functional/gdb-scripts/kernel_gdb_test.py
>> @@ -107,11 +107,13 @@ def do_one_watch(sym, wtype, text):
>>   def check_watches(sym_name):
>>       "Watch a symbol for any access."
>>   -    # Should hit for any read
>> -    do_one_watch(sym_name, gdb.WP_ACCESS, "awatch")
>> +    # s390 only supports write watchpoints
>> +    if "s390" not in gdb.selected_frame().architecture().name():
>> +        # Should hit for any read
>> +        do_one_watch(sym_name, gdb.WP_ACCESS, "awatch")
>>   -    # Again should hit for reads
>> -    do_one_watch(sym_name, gdb.WP_READ, "rwatch")
>> +        # Again should hit for reads
>> +        do_one_watch(sym_name, gdb.WP_READ, "rwatch")
>>         # Finally when it is written
>>       do_one_watch(sym_name, gdb.WP_WRITE, "watch")
>> diff --git a/tests/functional/s390x/test_tuxrun.py b/tests/functional/s390x/test_tuxrun.py
>> index 8e0261e2b7f..528af3c08ff 100755
>> --- a/tests/functional/s390x/test_tuxrun.py
>> +++ b/tests/functional/s390x/test_tuxrun.py
>> @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@ class TuxRunS390xTest(TuxRunBaselineTest):
>>       ASSET_S390X_KERNEL = Asset(
>>           'https://storage.tuxboot.com/kernels/6.18.54/s390/bzImage',
>>           '5efeb31754b211440e1595ab11355bb006fe78a2c0604ed0a8c55c4598b71aec')
>> +    ASSET_S390X_VMLINUX = Asset(
>> +        'https://storage.tuxboot.com/kernels/6.18.54/s390/vmlinux.xz',
>> +        '5bbd4d34e0950f88053a9bfd16078896df4b1ee1696fc2ad62488e681a6bdd8e')
>>       ASSET_S390X_ROOTFS = Asset(
>>           'https://storage.tuxboot.com/buildroot/20260924/s390/rootfs.ext4.zst',
>>           '5ba18c4d18831c50a0c743990f7bdee1d3b520629d423c55b668d8fbbac9c6f5')
>> @@ -42,5 +45,16 @@ def test_s390_kvm(self):
>>                              haltmsg="Requesting system halt",
>>                              accel="kvm")
>>   +    def test_s390_kvm_gdb(self):
>> +        self.set_machine('s390-ccw-virtio')
>> +        self.require_accelerator('kvm')
>> +        self.wait_for_shutdown=False
>> +        self.common_tuxrun_gdb(kernel_asset=self.ASSET_S390X_KERNEL,
>> +                               vmlinux_asset=self.ASSET_S390X_VMLINUX,
>> +                               rootfs_asset=self.ASSET_S390X_ROOTFS,
>> +                               drive="virtio-blk-ccw",
>> +                               haltmsg="Requesting system halt",
>> +                               accel="kvm")
>> +
>>   if __name__ == '__main__':
>>       TuxRunBaselineTest.main()
>
> This hangs unfortunately.
> You need something like the following to compensate for the difference
> between vmlinux ELF addresses and the actual nokaslr load address:

I realise now I had it working on my s390x image and forgot to fold the
changes from that tree into my local git. Fixed in v3

-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro