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 D3C85C433F5 for ; Mon, 9 May 2022 15:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238408AbiEIPo5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2022 11:44:57 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50348 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238376AbiEIPon (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2022 11:44:43 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB9B2AC3 for ; Mon, 9 May 2022 08:40:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1652110848; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=f20KjEs82jGqw96l1DoBfDRekni2iSTjN+mGw5ax9tc=; b=WtK/h+FKwISW+tiWsmC2mny1CN08+Pzfwcm3xd096KXQlVm+RZE/0eYVFSRKH1KjXArzsD apwRomu/sh2AB0mvLDPyjHANOYOblWwrwS0HBrY33/qsEJI8OdNvGjHj/OYA+ro1Pl/kYE DPrNFHg9o+rdXP+PYTLLM77Cq9YSKxw= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-282-MBlBrtTdOM-GxFYmJjO0Uw-1; Mon, 09 May 2022 11:40:46 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MBlBrtTdOM-GxFYmJjO0Uw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8396E811E75; Mon, 9 May 2022 15:40:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.39.193.170]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A56A455D9F; Mon, 9 May 2022 15:40:45 +0000 (UTC) From: Cornelia Huck To: Mark Brown Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Shuah Khan , Joey Gouly , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ARM64] status of MTE selftests? In-Reply-To: Organization: Red Hat GmbH References: <87wney4svy.fsf@redhat.com> <87levb3u1s.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.34 (https://notmuchmail.org) Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 17:40:43 +0200 Message-ID: <87zgjq3e9w.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.9 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 09 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 11:59:59AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> On Fri, May 06 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > I would expect them to work, they seemed happy when I was doing >> > the async mode support IIRC and a quick spin with -next in qemu >> > everything seems fine, I'm travelling so don't have the >> > environment for models to hand right now. > >> Thanks; I think that points to some setup/config problem on my side, >> then :/ (I ran the selftests under QEMU's tcg emulation, and while it >> looks better, I still get timeouts for check_gcr_el1_cswitch and >> check_user_mem.) > > That might just be an actual timeout depending on the preformance of > the host system. Our mails may have crossed mid-air; the tests finish for me eventually. > >> >> where $AXF contains a kernel at v5.18-rc5-16-g107c948d1d3e[2] and an >> >> initrd built by mbuto[3] from that level with a slightly tweaked "kselftests" >> >> profile (adding /dev/shm). > >> > What are you using for EL3 with the model? Both TF-A and >> > boot-wrapper are in regular use, TF-A gets *way* more testing >> > than boot-wrapper which is mostly used by individual developers. > >> I'm building the .axf via boot-wrapper-aarch64 (enabling psci and gicv3, >> if that matters.) Didn't try to make use of TF-A yet beyond the dtb (I'm >> still in the process of getting familiar with the arm64 world, so I'm >> currently starting out with the setups that others had shared with me.) > > I'm now back with the models and it turns out that while qemu is happy I > can reproduce what you're seeing with the model, at least as far back as > v5.15 which suggests it's likely to be more operator error than a bug. > Trying to figure it out now. Ok, thanks for looking.