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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDB66C433EF for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345476AbiATAqL (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:46:11 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44364 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237369AbiATAqJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:46:09 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F43CC061574 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:46:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id h13so3244213plf.2 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:46:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=z1+U22Ey9LHJyAQychC6fcENsG+quV5jEHyAx5BylAw=; b=Bz0p8Zcp6TiQdxq+B7pfMnQ2uWc+Gwc7mIbxWuImGZ2IqYsA/+ua/R++MjT+bHOoYI alnQCi7yjl2wdnfo0WbFHLIcr4zLyV41sEiSwiqHjZXc2iilfficow6CsHu6tyxHgzgL kz3gskljZcQbzmPAB/E9Wq+ghCCL66hYLG0HXFqh4nEPnSateGWMQbC038uVQJ8AZXUP dKG8L5M0sX7qICEx1sogWejAvaeb6RnP2C5cN7AtvHwL0DFNBdUbf6y0/wpSDYussPJV S0af1oWoleTyG2Oc5FRml51gDGA6CJwbqbnNd1ikJ9G5G9ttFaD9UApTqIozc8tW8u9J wQpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=z1+U22Ey9LHJyAQychC6fcENsG+quV5jEHyAx5BylAw=; b=uhhGf9+L5wj8yZt+7z0FP1diG9Ng5nMryFEKU3tQIJhm3k9QL0AyS5Y/zC0fNaOTMC XGniy3MLAE4l19bY4480KCoHl23YNQxoNq32WsFWfhWU/nqlHmW2BxPmHIIaczfk7Cs6 s+WaTki/jpfOuX/n3rQBOCN4CqT3HRNj2tUD1KymUHiHrB80cuCMo6A/l1aQMhJd4oYN KE5K/BCGUSzg4tZzLYGhc/s3fqrgGCTjM7u7OUmKPSEkLhduCmAZ9Eif2EGUQ6aH62Fq uQsrm2nyDT/ala+U72LwGsaVX3MElg/eYbB4JbyV1XTWpRtoqv6iZbT7EKOujLdBfRX9 uIlw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5306zPvdDTRj2wWqqToJdLrNPoZMkJgIs0k9n9cfBI4+3DhkmraR HdoeA3EXmtdQ2X0Hnpx0KcaFhQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxagGHiAunUi3cXKfBOcqeiMDzVCT/4wqGdFgLfzK2Qdj6qmm+STb8BuYXMNDY/gFtl4KfFEg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e84e:b0:14a:f05f:5897 with SMTP id t14-20020a170902e84e00b0014af05f5897mr6063562plg.108.1642639568765; Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:46:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (157.214.185.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.185.214.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g7sm412266pjk.37.2022.01.19.16.46.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:46:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:46:04 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Aaron Lewis Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, jmattson@google.com Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 3/4] x86: Add a test framework for nested_vmx_reflect_vmexit() testing Message-ID: References: <20211214011823.3277011-1-aaronlewis@google.com> <20211214011823.3277011-4-aaronlewis@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 19, 2022, Aaron Lewis wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/x86/unittests.cfg b/x86/unittests.cfg > > > index 9fcdcae..0353b69 100644 > > > --- a/x86/unittests.cfg > > > +++ b/x86/unittests.cfg > > > @@ -368,6 +368,13 @@ arch = x86_64 > > > groups = vmx nested_exception > > > check = /sys/module/kvm_intel/parameters/allow_smaller_maxphyaddr=Y > > > > > > +[vmx_exception_test] > > > +file = vmx.flat > > > +extra_params = -cpu max,+vmx -append vmx_exception_test > > > +arch = x86_64 > > > +groups = vmx nested_exception > > > +timeout = 10 > > > > Why add a new test case instead of folding this into "vmx"? It's quite speedy. > > The "vmx" bucket definitely needs some cleanup, but I don't thinking adding a bunch > > of one-off tests is the way forward. > > > > I'm not sure I follow. The test does run in the "vmx" bucket > AFAICT... Oh, do you mean it should be added to the extra_params here > along with the other tests? Yep, exactly. "vmx" really needs to be split up and/or reworked so that it's command line isn't so ridiculous, but that's a future problem.