Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v9 03/31] powerpc: Mark known failing tests as kfail

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 07/05/2024 06.07, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Mon May 6, 2024 at 5:37 PM AEST, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 04/05/2024 14.28, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>>> Mark the failing h_cede_tm and spapr_vpa tests as kfail.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    powerpc/spapr_vpa.c | 3 ++-
>>>    powerpc/tm.c        | 3 ++-
>>>    2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/powerpc/spapr_vpa.c b/powerpc/spapr_vpa.c
>>> index c2075e157..46fa0485c 100644
>>> --- a/powerpc/spapr_vpa.c
>>> +++ b/powerpc/spapr_vpa.c
>>> @@ -150,7 +150,8 @@ static void test_vpa(void)
>>>    		report_fail("Could not deregister after registration");
>>>    
>>>    	disp_count1 = be32_to_cpu(vpa->vp_dispatch_count);
>>> -	report(disp_count1 % 2 == 1, "Dispatch count is odd after deregister");
>>> +	/* TCG known fail, could be wrong test, must verify against PowerVM */
>>> +	report_kfail(true, disp_count1 % 2 == 1, "Dispatch count is odd after deregister");
>>
>> Using "true" as first argument looks rather pointless - then you could also
>> simply delete the test completely if it can never be tested reliably.
>>
>> Thus could you please introduce a helper function is_tcg() that could be
>> used to check whether we run under TCG (and not KVM)? I think you could
>> check for "linux,kvm" in the "compatible" property in /hypervisor in the
>> device tree to see whether we're running in KVM mode or in TCG mode.
> 
> This I added in patch 30.
> 
> The reason for the suboptimal patch ordering was just me being lazy and
> avoiding rebasing annoyance. I'd written a bunch of failing test cases
> for QEMU work, but hadn't done the kvm/tcg test yet. It had a few
> conflicts so I put it at the end... can rebase if you'd really prefer.

Ah, ok, no need to rebase then, as long it's there in the end, it's fine.

  Thanks,
   Thomas