Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Satyanarayana K V P" <satyanarayana.k.v.p@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 7/7] drm/xe/tests: Add KUnit tests for VF provisioning error handling
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 13:00:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260812130053.EFABB1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260812124313.1377582-16-satyanarayana.k.v.p@intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The GGTT initialization path skips alignment validation and performs partial state updates before validation completes, which the new KUnit tests fail to detect.
--

--- Patch [7]: [PATCH v6 7/7] drm/xe/tests: Add KUnit tests for VF provisioning error handling ---
commit 5074ef2c8cf15b0dd4c9cdf94819ab386e4100b7
Author: Satyanarayana K V P <satyanarayana.k.v.p@intel.com>

drm/xe/tests: Add KUnit tests for VF provisioning error handling

This commit adds KUnit test cases for VF provisioning error handling. It
uses the xe_guc_mmio_send_recv() stub to inject bad KLV responses and
verifies that the VF can handle invalid configuration data.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_gt_sriov_vf_kunit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_gt_sriov_vf_kunit.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..8cb7f3cebb311
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_gt_sriov_vf_kunit.c
[ ... ]
> +struct config_ggtt {
> +	u64 start_orig;
> +	u64 start_query;
> +	u64 size_orig;
> +	u64 size_query;
> +	int expected_ret;
> +	int ret;
> +	int flags;
> +	const char *name;
> +} vf_ggtt_testcase[] = {
[ ... ]
> +	{
> +		.start_orig = TEST_GGTT_START,		.start_query = TEST_GGTT_START,
> +		.size_orig = TEST_GGTT_SIZE - SZ_2K,	.size_query = TEST_GGTT_SIZE - SZ_2K,
> +		.expected_ret = -EINVAL,		.flags = 0,
> +		.name = "unaligned_size_4K",
> +
> +	},

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but the new KUnit tests unintentionally mask
a bug in the early return path of vf_get_ggtt_info().

By setting size_orig to a non-zero value (TEST_GGTT_SIZE - SZ_2K) in this
unaligned test case, the test avoids the initial provisioning path. If
size_orig was set to 0 (which reflects the actual initial provisioning state),
the test would fail because vf_get_ggtt_info() incorrectly returns 0 instead
of -EINVAL.

Looking at vf_get_ggtt_info() in drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_vf.c:

	xe_tile_sriov_vf_ggtt_base_store(tile, start);
	ggtt_size = xe_tile_sriov_vf_ggtt(tile);
	if (!ggtt_size) {
		/* ... */
		xe_tile_sriov_vf_ggtt_store(tile, size);
		return 0;
	}

During initial provisioning (when ggtt_size is 0), unvalidated start and size
values are stored and the function returns early, completely bypassing the
IS_ALIGNED validation checks that occur later in the function.

Should the alignment checks in vf_get_ggtt_info() be moved before this early
return, and should these KUnit tests be updated to include scenarios where
size_orig is 0 to verify the initial provisioning path?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260812124313.1377582-9-satyanarayana.k.v.p@intel.com?part=7

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-12 17:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-12 12:43 [PATCH v6 0/7] KUnit test for VF provisioning error handling Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] drm/xe/guc: Allow to replace xe_guc_mmio_send_recv() with KUNIT stub Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] drm/xe/vf: Split submission config query helpers Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] drm/xe/vf: Add bounds checking for queried context and doorbell counts Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] drm/xe: Introduce helpers for xe_vram size Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] drm/xe/vf: Add bounds checking for queried GGTT base and size Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 12:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] drm/xe/vf: Add bounds checking for queried VRAM size Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 13:02   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 12:43 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] drm/xe/tests: Add KUnit tests for VF provisioning error handling Satyanarayana K V P
2026-08-12 13:00   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-12 13:18 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for KUnit test for VF provisioning error handling (rev6) Patchwork
2026-08-12 13:19 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2026-08-12 14:20 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-08-12 18:27 ` ✓ Xe.CI.FULL: " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260812130053.EFABB1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=satyanarayana.k.v.p@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox