Re: [linux-next:master] [KVM] 7803339fa9: kernel-selftests.kvm.pmu_counters_test.fail

["Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>]

On 1/22/2025 12:13 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025, Dapeng Mi wrote:
>> On 1/18/2025 1:11 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>> @@ -98,14 +149,12 @@ static uint8_t guest_get_pmu_version(void)
>>>   * Sanity check that in all cases, the event doesn't count when it's disabled,
>>>   * and that KVM correctly emulates the write of an arbitrary value.
>>>   */
>>> -static void guest_assert_event_count(uint8_t idx,
>>> -				     struct kvm_x86_pmu_feature event,
>>> -				     uint32_t pmc, uint32_t pmc_msr)
>>> +static void guest_assert_event_count(uint8_t idx, uint32_t pmc, uint32_t pmc_msr)
>>>  {
>>>  	uint64_t count;
>>>  
>>>  	count = _rdpmc(pmc);
>>> -	if (!this_pmu_has(event))
>>> +	if (!(hardware_pmu_arch_events & BIT(idx)))
>>>  		goto sanity_checks;
>>>  
>>>  	switch (idx) {
>>> @@ -126,7 +175,9 @@ static void guest_assert_event_count(uint8_t idx,
>>>  		GUEST_ASSERT_NE(count, 0);
>>>  		break;
>>>  	case INTEL_ARCH_TOPDOWN_SLOTS_INDEX:
>>> -		GUEST_ASSERT(count >= NUM_INSNS_RETIRED);
>>> +		__GUEST_ASSERT(count < NUM_INSNS_RETIRED,
>> shouldn't be "__GUEST_ASSERT(count >= NUM_INSNS_RETIRED," ?
> Yes.  I had intentionally inverted the check to verify the assert message and
> forgot to flip it back before hitting "send".  Thankfully, I didn't forget before
> posting formally[*].  Ugh, but I did forget to Cc you on that series, sorry :-/
>
> [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250117234204.2600624-6-seanjc@google.com

Good to know. Thanks.


>