From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] KVM selftests for s390x References: <20190516111253.4494-1-thuth@redhat.com> <9423ba89-b10e-5e6e-3cc8-8088f3088233@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <4d94124e-00f6-aa65-3a4a-bd8910480329@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 13:43:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9423ba89-b10e-5e6e-3cc8-8088f3088233@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Thomas Huth , Christian Borntraeger , Janosch Frank , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Jones Cc: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Shuah Khan , David Hildenbrand , Cornelia Huck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 20/05/19 13:30, Thomas Huth wrote: >> No objections at all, though it would be like to have ucall plumbed in >> from the beginning. > I'm still looking at the ucall interface ... what I don't quite get yet > is the question why the ucall_type there is selectable during runtime? > > Are there plans to have test that could either use UCALL_PIO or > UCALL_MMIO? If not, what about moving ucall_init() and ucall() to > architecture specific code in tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/aarch64/ > and tools/testing/selftests/kvm/lib/x86_64 instead, and to remove the > ucall_type stuff again (so that x86 is hard-wired to PIO and aarch64 > is hard-wired to MMIO)? ... then I could add a DIAG-based ucall > on s390x more easily, I think. Yes, that would work. I think Andrew wanted the flexibility to use MMIO on x86, but it's not really necessary to have it. Paolo