Kernel KVM virtualization development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
To: Piotr Zarycki <piotr.zarycki@gmail.com>,
	seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: shuah@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: hyperv_features: test write of 1 to HV_X64_MSR_RESET
Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 14:26:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <875x4bllp4.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ahGPQDJCT1aW7vVY@arch-piotr>

Piotr Zarycki <piotr.zarycki@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> After receiving KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET the test simply advances to the
> next stage without resetting the vCPU. Is verifying
> KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET is delivered sufficient?
>

For every stage of this test we're basically using a new VM
(vm_create_with_one_vcpu()) thus it does not really matter much what we
do after receiving KVM_SYSTEM_EVENT_RESET.

The basic idea behind the test was to verify that
KVM_CAP_HYPERV_ENFORCE_CPUID works as expected, i.e. the guest gets
access to the MSRs/hypercalls according to the guest visible CPUIDs and
not to everything KVM knows about (I guess we could've named it
'hyperv_feature_access' to actually reflect that). It, however, makes
sense to actually test side-effects of writing to MSRs/using hypercalls,
especially when it's relatively easy and I see that the change here goes
in this direction. With this, I think it is a good and sufficient
change, so

Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>

Thanks!

-- 
Vitaly


      reply	other threads:[~2026-05-25 12:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-23 11:18 [PATCH] KVM: selftests: hyperv_features: test write of 1 to HV_X64_MSR_RESET Piotr Zarycki
2026-05-23 11:30 ` Piotr Zarycki
2026-05-25 12:26   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov [this message]

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=875x4bllp4.fsf@redhat.com \
    --to=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=piotr.zarycki@gmail.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /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