Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 2/2] s390x: firq: floating interrupt test

[Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>]

On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 09:15:00 +0100
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:

> >>>  
> >>>>  
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +	/*
> >>>>> +	 * We want CPU #2 to be stopped. This should be the case at this
> >>>>> +	 * point, however, we want to sense if it even exists as well.
> >>>>> +	 */
> >>>>> +	ret = smp_cpu_stop(2);
> >>>>> +	if (ret) {
> >>>>> +		report_skip("CPU #2 not found");  
> >>>>
> >>>> Since you already queried for the availablity of at least 3 CPUs above, I
> >>>> think you could turn this into a report_fail() instead?  
> >>>
> >>> either that or an assert, but again, no strong opinions
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Just because there are >= 3 CPUs doesn't imply that CPU #2 is around.  
> > 
> > Ok, fair point. But if #2 is not around, it means that the test has been run 
> > in the wrong way by the user... I wonder what's better in that case - to 
> > skip this test or to go out with a bang. Skipping the test has the advantage 
> > of looking a little bit more "polite", but it has the disadvantage that it 
> > might get lost in automation, e.g. if somebody enabled the test in their CI, 
> > but did something wrong in the settings, they might not notice that the test 
> > is not run at all...  
> 
> I sticked to what we have in s390x/smp.c, where we fail if we only have
> a single CPU.
> 
> But I don't particularly care (and have to move on doing other stuff),
> so I'll do whatever maintainers want and resend :)
> 

a better solution for number != ID is needed (aka: I'll try to fix
it when I have the time), for now it works, so leave it as it is.