From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCC3CCA5FCE for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2026 05:31:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4hyp0s1WlGz2yjw; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 16:31:57 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2607:f8b0:4864:36::f" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1791178317; cv=none; b=PeJ8TXcJlPFinefqN3BLIXV/rwn4AlyicfZhDw/Zr+se9WaFT5jafafxxZx4ijvt7MvLehgPdfhad3JTyhNKnxSmwT0DJYICbUCreM4/by1AH8Cx5ovaWR2Mm9cD1xVdZfPBCXvvPrOkQw5P7fE5Xv53XDdnykZzgX+q1Es47Q/F/hlBfPIhMUNaLIF1DIUWO6D+j2Vno1fmQfsuyunam9m0yJ9sPsQko8i9bVrPATtfFMzq+dk44oaqOhQrm67xaYfR3OndHxHWSFpErR5jw0anWWR2M/6kJ7HELd9sGpPmQvC5wlSRTN1SSFAEziouo0TXEg1Vfj9sH8SFyaX0NQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1791178317; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=cIbXE6R67m8wmmcQnF+5IRKqUHaCj3Oi7gyWQv3055A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=Yw6D9Z9H2vmuGXFyiMTYBYtvpQpvbKTPhMn52n3dhZj+ng4IZVE6vLlmXuvW+UOpbDu1qWoQB99VCyBo30aEzqVzzuBh/w/W6uLQy9xAnlqfQbCnBOdbbhJsqVv3Z39Jn3QuegAM5LZMwtRXbpWMikhXP04eAZuZjyTMy7sgHVoskfhd+a2vQSmsR1flYFBJGM6O8/LDk3fB7vIQamnMspxEupfwG+tlnEd0hf32GOwyPpamSnl3G7xrAhN5P7wuvlykCXXnfzapOT2DSr3oNHZMek8MzzskAJQTxTB9s7NjoLKw15EgFnDa8o/LCqe6CO0yocKvAIkZNvgaGTe8yQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=DVCNkQtE; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:36::f; helo=mail-dy2-x0f.google.com; envelope-from=ritesh.list@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=DVCNkQtE; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:36::f; helo=mail-dy2-x0f.google.com; envelope-from=ritesh.list@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mail-dy2-x0f.google.com (mail-dy2-x0f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:36::f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4hyp0p5FYdz2yf9 for ; Mon, 05 Oct 2026 16:31:53 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-dy2-x0f.google.com with SMTP id 5a478bee46e88-33e46a15703so1675300eec.0 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2026 22:31:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1791178310; x=1791783110; darn=lists.ozlabs.org; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=cIbXE6R67m8wmmcQnF+5IRKqUHaCj3Oi7gyWQv3055A=; b=DVCNkQtEWrMfcSZuM0RLCNyL6whEvLWoIQyaUYpwgh4wiBp7qW7noYYIR/SaWUTFT5 maWiWMjfU5lGuUAyq7FlGWUq0QU2PFB93LZVmiNu6Gs4y/xC4CTCOemdJeMvZQ4H6ZvF GiQCcy5kseLSPApJqq/EPxfrep1DN9oIMXGXEQvMejJZ4Msz1m0nlgh+YvhPZNnKaMlU U5+e4fIzUCapp2UBOb5nGVGGaLEBVweK1hnE7J7hsS93ebqgCnzk1R3R2Jql+dyVprX6 SaCpuQ1vzPKfOiwRI1Y+XSBF4CJYa8fHQ3qlYCyhB9zUSK2GKzhhpOLetYdMi/fNPY4R ZUWg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1791178310; x=1791783110; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=cIbXE6R67m8wmmcQnF+5IRKqUHaCj3Oi7gyWQv3055A=; b=LcCwv932CnFgs8037AoOwnLkqddnIrH8ZNF/uXA5hpS0BwMut0Wqn6Ep4kynp9zXlA NmEZNbjCpdXqTEdD/ar/0+PINNMfJOEg7azhjdiGfaeQisoJDKmglyW3s2/Fs0MiJkyS pwA4bvKhAr2jyFMjqwYHZhtyKo1rU5tqAkpfx+O+JFxxhqA2vWHhsem7n1S3LIk8iWJ9 AOnts3aKebkVXbTa2f9Vbq2pcxieI7DwRsDAC22M/Ut8AEsuUU+u5nJ2zFtJLilt+i7D waXoO+jIhN7MPCyX/Wu40BEO7MkkfP38+Loq9Pz9plQ2bXEfJM6oIJ3ju2iEi5GQoF1G F1fg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBwV2ww05mC8F9PU2GhZfFDOLhIR8RNtRL9qK5EHwuYd+1NrH5yrL+jWu9+LpfD3wKxK2/P0DO449UGqS1g=@lists.ozlabs.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++lPkCHxxXGwGS1Tx592QfSf6HWCCoV6v7v8mgkBfF07WPAmcIJX dgO+mhZkGYGviBbBfw47lyMyVP5VNzlxJdpb4R7qsFx/jxUBycJXxS3/ X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou3A8AZvhKqTwTsT7WOcQuHC+VMmaDiDdJSK8k7S9hfSzvVi6N2o8YrZT4z3NE4 5+1sCiyIwsclHW868d47c52MBKXNarwxVnyPewdLWh58K926XA3C4dOpIdoyUKnDS3akPGrtA4V KBrj2mCUl+AIlpmITpm4yyK7zDUNxgKIaoFx81pV8NH6VdJInaPB3GK43zZAiys7YshUg22tBYI SnLjRiccF/stNDoVHG560kp0s7wameYNMirkdusHHNm1GjYnqHyNT6Z6JgPv9wVRcNOY8ueHUZp BVET9TFsSxc+vV0fSPViozcsCP/SajFFIB/BT64CBh+Qdxx1lJMhTpdYonpW8SRnJ8H1QIvObaT WvAz0S6JWyntgMzSKvGIKthiYbpxCTdVPt97J/hPsjQPxdNis35q40gfecFoIHc/DeIk70hMCCb E6UvWcT/3kvkvTzbfe17upJCP9rHRoKRuY0J9jkDVigB75sdrM/CVHJ4IxRVuMvh4zSe6eEaaNq lFe85rnSImM9MkInY8l9Tm0OEu6cdKGSARn69ezBGGYNt47z2VDGNI/xEp9XoU4 X-Received: by 2002:a05:693c:69c5:b0:34c:45da:9b5 with SMTP id 5a478bee46e88-34f150c28c4mr12369259eec.20.1791178309882; Sun, 04 Oct 2026 22:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pve-server ([49.205.216.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-351271612e9sm10257390eec.12.2026.10.04.22.31.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 04 Oct 2026 22:31:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) To: Sean Christopherson Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Michael Ellerman , Christophe Leroy , Anushree Mathur , Venkat Rao Bagalkote , Harsh Prateek Bora , Madhavan Srinivasan , Shrikanth Hegde , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] KVM: selftests: add powerpc support In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2026 09:55:36 +0530 Message-ID: References: X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list Hi Sean, Sorry I didn't see this email before sending out v6. I think we can ignore v6, once the discussion here is sorted - I can share a v7. Sean Christopherson writes: > On Sat, Oct 03, 2026, Ritesh Harjani wrote: >> Sean Christopherson writes: >> Also note - I will open code the TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON and will skip the >> kvm_create_max_vcpus > > Oh, right, kvm_create_max_vcpus is a common test. Can userspace detect that it's > running KVM-on-PowerVM (in a not completely unpleasant way)? If so, an alternative > would be to keep the KVM_CAP_PPC_SMT change in v6 (patch 2) as a prep patch (before > adding PPC support to Makefile.kvm), and then add a > TEST_REQUIRE(!kvm_is_on_ppc_powervm()) or whatever. > So stictly speaking there is no simple check like that - however, I think we can skip the test when we are running on pseries LPAR (meaning trying to run a nested guest). We already have the check is_pseries_lpar() for access_tracking_perf_test. I think we can re-use the same check here as well. > I think I'd even prefer to take on an #ifdef (to scope it to PPC if necessary) > over open coding TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON. Sure, so will add this check for kvm_create_max_vcpus() #ifdef __powerpc64__ TEST_REQUIRE(!is_pseries_lpar()); #endif Actually I was thinking we may as well use the same check for now for skipping hardware_disable_test on pseries. Because there also we suffer from the same resource limitation. Let me know if that sounds ok to you or do you want us to skip kvm_create_max_vcpus() only for now, since it is part of TEST_GEN_PROGS_COMMON? > LoongArch open coded its full test list > for some reason, and in less than a year it has started missing out on new common > tests. > >> (& maybe few others like vm_types_test) from that in v6. > > What's wrong with VM types test? That one really should Just Work on all > architectures. It doesn't run on LoongArch, but I assume that's > oversight? So the test doesn't fail (it gets skipped). However this cap "KVM_CAP_VM_TYPES" is only supported on x86 and since I was planning to open code all common tests, hence I thought I may as well not add this in the first place. BTW, based on this discussion, I think I will re-arrange the patches in the following order and send a v7. (The Makefile.kvm changes will only get added after the main patch which adds powerpc support). cfabdb049bd7 2026-10-05 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] (HEAD -> feat-ppc-kvm-selftests-new-sean-v7) KVM: selftests: Skip hardware_disable_test on pseries 2b51fab87b95 2026-09-22 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: PPC: selftests: Skip idle-page check when running nested on pseries LPAR f5d1de1be4e9 2026-10-05 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: selftests: Skip kvm_create_max_vcpus on pseries e45ba15cea25 2026-10-03 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: PPC: selftests: Add helper for checking if running nested 178c9bca0e20 2026-09-22 [Nicholas Piggin] KVM: PPC: selftests: add support for powerpc 22320662e776 2026-09-11 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: selftests: Fix kvm_create_max_vcpus test for powerpc 11b5712b213b 2026-09-22 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: selftests: Move memslot_perf_test off the 256M ELF load address 63c900860b5f 2026-09-22 [Ritesh Harjani (IBM)] KVM: selftests: Don't limit LE dirty-bitmap bitops to s390x Please let me know if this sounds ok? -ritesh