Re: [Patch v1] x86: Fix the logical destination mode test

[Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>]

Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com> writes:

> On 4/14/20 11:30 AM, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/14/20 10:01 AM, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>>> Also, this patch could've been split.
>>> I can divide it 2 parts:
>>> 1. support for logical destination mode.
>>> 2. support for physical destination mode. I can also fix  the above issue in
>>> this patch itself.
>>> Does that make sense?
>> Too late, it's already commited :-) I just meant to say that
>> e.g. spinlock part could've been split into its own patch, unittests.cfg
>> - another one,...
>
> Ah, I see. I will be more careful.
> For now,  I will just move the physical destination mode test back under
> the check. Will that be acceptable as a standalone patch?

This is already in Paolo's patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/87zhbexh3v.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com/T/#m9791cd50a9d82fabdaddcb9259d14df3b89ed250

> In between I have a question is it normal for test_ioapic_self_reconfigure()
> to fail when executed with irqchip split?
> If so do we expect that it will leave the VM in some sort of dirty state
> that causes the following test to fail?

Not sure I got your question but IMO when someone does
./run_tests.sh
all tests are supposed to pass -- unless there is a bug in KVM (e.g. the
person is running an old kernel). In case we're seeing failures (or,
even worse, hangs) with the latest upstream kernel -- something is
broken, either KVM or kvm-unit-tests.

-- 
Vitaly