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

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

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