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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2D8C433E1 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 12:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1768720885 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 12:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="e1Q7sSaM" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1768720885 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B39804B3FF; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Authentication-Results: mm01.cs.columbia.edu (amavisd-new); dkim=softfail (fail, message has been altered) header.i=@redhat.com Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x2K7jJEBXs8O; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6BB04B5E8; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44FB74B57B for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VCskMhU8urAK for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4484B5DF for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 08:36:39 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1593693399; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kxsOgktW2aqco1gBT9/m2Ec8L8nDRwxKfKUWl4CDi+M=; b=e1Q7sSaMZ5a8v7eRItFkgUcfnPsjPBmkzQlSnRP1HB9NtQ1gwkgSdytVQ48Pm5LMn1SW1w 1VcBdnEE4RXrSvB7qZSMzHTS32lwg0mOxpDwzRBIP5g3HI/ZGgEONKn2bLGx3Lt39WlMCb eUT6BdQX5hTnqPr3zlbDbmOboWloLVY= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-131-0y5q3pXgN9WgJwLgr1QQDQ-1; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 08:36:37 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 0y5q3pXgN9WgJwLgr1QQDQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A9B6805EEE; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 12:36:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.70] (ovpn-112-70.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.70]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF5ADC14BC; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 12:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 1/8] arm64: microbench: get correct ipi received num To: Jingyi Wang , drjones@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu References: <20200702030132.20252-1-wangjingyi11@huawei.com> <20200702030132.20252-2-wangjingyi11@huawei.com> From: Auger Eric Message-ID: <39936695-eba6-d92b-db3b-fd8439503e50@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 14:36:33 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200702030132.20252-2-wangjingyi11@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 Cc: maz@kernel.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Hi Jingyi, On 7/2/20 5:01 AM, Jingyi Wang wrote: > If ipi_exec() fails because of timeout, we shouldn't increase > the number of ipi received. > > Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang Reviewed-by: Eric Auger Thanks Eric > --- > arm/micro-bench.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arm/micro-bench.c b/arm/micro-bench.c > index 4612f41..794dfac 100644 > --- a/arm/micro-bench.c > +++ b/arm/micro-bench.c > @@ -103,7 +103,9 @@ static void ipi_exec(void) > while (!ipi_received && tries--) > cpu_relax(); > > - ++received; > + if (ipi_received) > + ++received; > + > assert_msg(ipi_received, "failed to receive IPI in time, but received %d successfully\n", received); > } > > _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm