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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B30C43603 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 10:54:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17A872072D for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 10:54:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="HqzcwU//" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727566AbfLPKyV (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Dec 2019 05:54:21 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:45081 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727436AbfLPKyV (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Dec 2019 05:54:21 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1576493660; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NKfanrHwOpmLcOycHLXxbfC4P1nz4bcChNMeZN9SUEc=; b=HqzcwU//qB1L3daKsu/Zqxse0toCaV6VLTqONCWDsR4A3XUxWApPNS9ns8c8pbBb3G3Qfc mc3jqjVYMliWMWldAXsRlIY7B0Nxk9AhAeHS6bdP33YIUtFt78OQgVNHS3TqOOuXlcgZy9 IdoMX2yLd7AQYNlqtFysCHJeOLBgwOc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-35-LsjyBCTiNTSq51hB6-ezjA-1; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 05:54:16 -0500 X-MC-Unique: LsjyBCTiNTSq51hB6-ezjA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 862261005502; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 10:54:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gondolin (dhcp-192-245.str.redhat.com [10.33.192.245]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCB346759E; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 10:54:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 11:54:09 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck To: Pierre Morel Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 9/9] s390x: css: ping pong Message-ID: <20191216115409.3a89717a.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1576079170-7244-1-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <1576079170-7244-10-git-send-email-pmorel@linux.ibm.com> <20191213105009.482bab48.cohuck@redhat.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 17:50:02 +0100 Pierre Morel wrote: > On 2019-12-13 10:50, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > [This also got me thinking about your start_subchannel function > > again... do you also want to allow flags like e.g. SLI? It's not > > unusual for commands to return different lengths of data depending on > > what features are available; it might be worthwhile to allow short data > > if you're not sure that e.g. a command returns either the short or the > > long version of a structure.] > > I would prefer to keep simple it in this series if you agree. Sure, that's fine. > > AFAIU the current QEMU implementation use a fix length and if a short > read occurs it is an error. > Since we test on PONG, there should be no error. It all depends on how the QEMU device is supposed to work. For a command reading/writing some data, I'd usually expect the following: - If SLI is not set, require the length to be the exact value expected by the device; otherwise, generate an error. - If SLI is set, require the length to be between the minimum length that makes sense and the full length of the buffer; otherwise, generate an error. Of course, if minimum length == full length, SLI has no real effect :) > > I agree that for a general test we should change this, but currently the > goal is just to verify that the remote device is PONG. > > If we accept variable length, we need to check the length of what we > received, and this could need some infrastructure changes that I would > like to do later. You mean at the device level? At the driver level (== here), you should simply get an error or not, I guess. > > When the series is accepted I will begin to do more complicated things like: > - checking the exceptions for wrong parameters > This is the first I will add. Agreed, that's probably the most useful one. > - checking the response difference on flags (SLI, SKP) > - using CC and CD flags for chaining > - TIC, NOP, suspend/resume and PCI > > These last one will be fun, we can also trying to play with prefetch > while at it. :) I think any kind of ccw chain will already be fun :) It's probably not so well tested anyway, as virtio is basically single-command.