From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.74]:42616 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729881AbgC3MvA (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:51:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] s390x: Add stsi 3.2.2 tests References: <20200330122035.19607-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Message-ID: Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:50:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200330122035.19607-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Janosch Frank , kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com On 30.03.20 14:20, Janosch Frank wrote: > Subcode 3.2.2 is handled by KVM/QEMU and should therefore be tested > a bit more thorough. >=20 > In this test we set a custom name and uuid through the QEMU command > line. Both parameters will be passed to the guest on a stsi subcode > 3.2.2 call and will then be checked. >=20 > We also compare the total and configured cpu numbers against the smp > reported numbers. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank > --- > s390x/stsi.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > s390x/unittests.cfg | 1 + > 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+) >=20 > diff --git a/s390x/stsi.c b/s390x/stsi.c > index e9206bca137d2edb..10e588a78cc05186 100644 > --- a/s390x/stsi.c > +++ b/s390x/stsi.c > @@ -14,7 +14,28 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > =20 > +struct stsi_322 { > + uint8_t reserved[31]; > + uint8_t count; > + struct { > + uint8_t reserved2[4]; I dislike aligning the members using double-spaces ... > + uint16_t total_cpus; > + uint16_t conf_cpus; > + uint16_t standby_cpus; > + uint16_t reserved_cpus; > + uint8_t name[8]; > + uint32_t caf; > + uint8_t cpi[16]; > + uint8_t reserved5[3]; ... e.g., here it's not aligned anymore. Just use single spaces. > + uint8_t ext_name_encoding; > + uint32_t reserved3; > + uint8_t uuid[16]; > + } vm[8]; > + uint8_t reserved4[1504]; > + uint8_t ext_names[8][256]; > +}; > static uint8_t pagebuf[PAGE_SIZE * 2] __attribute__((aligned(PAGE_SIZE= * 2))); > =20 > static void test_specs(void) > @@ -76,11 +97,52 @@ static void test_fc(void) > report(stsi_get_fc(pagebuf) >=3D 2, "query fc >=3D 2"); > } > =20 > +static void test_3_2_2(void) > +{ > + int rc; > + /* EBCDIC for "kvm-unit" */ > + uint8_t vm_name[] =3D { 0x92, 0xa5, 0x94, 0x60, 0xa4, 0x95, 0x89, 0xa= 3 }; > + uint8_t uuid[] =3D { 0x0f, 0xb8, 0x4a, 0x86, 0x72, 0x7c, > + 0x11, 0xea, 0xbc, 0x55, 0x02, 0x42, 0xac, 0x13, > + 0x00, 0x03 }; > + /* EBCDIC for "KVM/" */ > + uint8_t cpi_kvm[] =3D { 0xd2, 0xe5, 0xd4, 0x61 }; All of these can be const. > + const char *vm_name_ext =3D "kvm-unit-test"; > + struct stsi_322 *data =3D (void *)pagebuf; > + > + /* Is the function code available at all? */ > + if (stsi_get_fc(pagebuf) < 3) Maybe report_skip() ? > + return; > + > + report_prefix_push("3.2.2"); > + rc =3D stsi(pagebuf, 3, 2, 2); > + report(!rc, "call"); > + > + /* For now we concentrate on KVM/QEMU */ > + if (memcmp(&data->vm[0].cpi, cpi_kvm, sizeof(cpi_kvm))) Maybe report_skip() ? > + goto out; > + > + report(data->vm[0].total_cpus =3D=3D smp_query_num_cpus(), "cpu # tot= al"); > + report(data->vm[0].conf_cpus =3D=3D smp_query_num_cpus(), "cpu # conf= igured"); > + report(data->vm[0].standby_cpus =3D=3D 0, "cpu # standby"); > + report(data->vm[0].reserved_cpus =3D=3D 0, "cpu # reserved"); IIRC, using -smp 1,maxcpus=3DX, you could also test the reported reserved CPUs. Also passes under TCG, nice :) --=20 Thanks, David / dhildenb