From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests 2/3] arm64: timer: Fix test on APM X-Gene Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 19:13:44 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170713192009.10069-1-cdall@linaro.org> <20170713192009.10069-3-cdall@linaro.org> <20170714154512.GC1535@lvm> <20170718100503.crn2dgqlalrirzqw@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> <20170718103512.GB14069@cbox> <20170718121527.ptemrr6mbhfwwbwe@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E4740FAF for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:12:51 -0400 (EDT) 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 U16rCBH9t+xx for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:12:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DBDD40017 for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:12:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20170718121527.ptemrr6mbhfwwbwe@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu To: Andrew Jones , Christoffer Dall Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu On 18/07/2017 14:15, Andrew Jones wrote: >> >> If we want to add a "the platform provides a timer with 56 valid bits in >> the counter and compare register", then I think it should be a separate >> test, and the the user can see that "basic stuff works", "architecture >> compliance not so much" and shrug accordingly. > Two separate tests sounds good to me. Although, if the value of 'now' is > large enough that now + 10s will set bit 31, then a mustang run (at least > mine) will fail - and most likely cause a lot of confusion, since it > normally does not. We should probably attempt to address that known issue > in some way as well. Is the value relative to vm startup or host startup? Paolo