From: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>
To: Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>
Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>,
Josh Hilke <jrhilke@google.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] vfio: selftests: Add tests to validate SR-IOV UAPI
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 14:01:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260505205825.GA4169286.vipinsh@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHc60ysfZCENvNsWSLrp=ughrgR5M3wSM4Z669ESanMPnMm6g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 01:49:55PM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 11:52 AM Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 04, 2026 at 10:51:41AM -0700, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 11:08 AM Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 05:30:59PM +0000, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> > > > > +TEST_F(vfio_pci_sriov_uapi_test, override_token)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct vfio_pci_device *pf;
> > > > > + struct vfio_pci_device *vf;
> > > > > + struct iommu *iommu;
> > > > > + int ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + iommu = iommu_init(variant->iommu_mode);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + pf = device_init(pf_bdf, iommu, UUID_2, &ret);
> > > >
> > > > I am assuming because of this, you cannot move device_init and
> > > > device_cleanup calls to FIXTURE_SETUP and FIXTURE_TEARDOWN respectively.
> > > >
> > > > Can we just start this test with device_cleanup(), then do init with
> > > > UUID_2? This will allow to reduce the code in all of the tests by moving
> > > > things to corresponding setup and teardown functions. WDYT?
> > > >
> > > Yes it was intentionally kept this way for the 'override_token' test.
> > > Also see the previous 'pf_early_close' test that performs a premature
> > > cleanup of the PF. To accommodate these (and any future TEST_F()s we
> > > may want to add) based on your suggestion, we'd have to create
> > > special/conditional statements across the tests and I'd like to avoid
> > > that if possible. The current setup clearly shows what each test
> > > does/requires.
> > >
> >
> > I think if you make device_cleanup() handle already cleaned up device as
> > no-op this should avoid any special handling.
> >
>
> Having a conditional check to avoid doing the cleanup only to satisfy
> the 'pf_early_close' test was the special handling that I was
> referring to.
> No other test requires this.
>
> > iommu_init() and device_init() with UUID_1 will be used by all three
> > tests in FIXTURE_SETUP(). Their corresponding cleanup will be in
> > FIXTURE_TEARDOWN().
> >
>
> 'override_token' first initializes the PF with UUID_2 as the token and
> then overrides to UUID_1.
> To easily satisfy all the tests, ASSERT_COND_VF_CREATION() was built
> on the assumption that when the VF is verified, the pf token will
> always be UUID_1.
>
> Anyway, I tried moving the PF setup into FIXTURE_SETUP() and the PF/VF
> cleanups into FIXTURE_CLEANUP(), and I adjusted
> ASSERT_COND_VF_CREATION() to accommodate any PF token for comparison.
> I'll push these changes to v8 soon. Let me know what you think.
>
I am assuming you meant for both iommu and PF setup/cleanup in the
FIXTURE macro. Sounds good, looking forward to v8.
Thanks
Vipin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-05 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-02 17:30 [PATCH v7 0/8] vfio: selftest: Add SR-IOV UAPI test Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 1/8] vfio: selftests: Add -Wall and -Werror to the Makefile Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 2/8] vfio: selftests: Introduce snprintf_assert() Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 3/8] vfio: selftests: Introduce a sysfs lib Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-06 21:12 ` Alex Williamson
2026-04-07 22:46 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 4/8] vfio: selftests: Extend container/iommufd setup for passing vf_token Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 5/8] vfio: selftests: Expose more vfio_pci_device functions Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 6/8] vfio: selftests: Add helper to set/override a vf_token Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 7/8] vfio: selftests: Add helpers to alloc/free vfio_pci_device Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-02 17:30 ` [PATCH v7 8/8] vfio: selftests: Add tests to validate SR-IOV UAPI Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-06 22:24 ` David Matlack
2026-04-07 20:51 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-04-07 21:01 ` David Matlack
2026-04-13 18:11 ` Vipin Sharma
2026-04-13 18:08 ` Vipin Sharma
2026-05-04 17:51 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-05-05 18:52 ` Vipin Sharma
2026-05-05 20:49 ` Raghavendra Rao Ananta
2026-05-05 21:01 ` Vipin Sharma [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260505205825.GA4169286.vipinsh@google.com \
--to=vipinsh@google.com \
--cc=alex@shazbot.org \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=jrhilke@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rananta@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox