On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 07:54:01AM -0700, Oliver Upton wrote:
> Hi Drew,
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 6:45 AM Andrew Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 07:16:09PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > > Split up the current test into several helpers that will be useful to
> > > subsequent test cases added to the PSCI test suite.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > .../testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/psci_test.c | 68 ++++++++++++-------
> > > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/psci_test.c
> > > b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/psci_test.c
> > > index 8d043e12b137..90312be335da 100644
> > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/psci_test.c
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/aarch64/psci_test.c
> > > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static uint64_t psci_affinity_info(uint64_t
> > > target_affinity,
> > > return res.a0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > -static void guest_main(uint64_t target_cpu)
> > > +static void guest_test_cpu_on(uint64_t target_cpu)
> > > {
> > > GUEST_ASSERT(!psci_cpu_on(target_cpu, CPU_ON_ENTRY_ADDR,
> > > CPU_ON_CONTEXT_ID));
> > > uint64_t target_state;
> > > @@ -69,12 +69,10 @@ static void vcpu_power_off(struct kvm_vm *vm,
> > > uint32_t vcpuid)
> > > vcpu_set_mp_state(vm, vcpuid, &mp_state);
> > > }
Context from last patch.
> > >
> > > -int main(void)
> > > +static struct kvm_vm *setup_vm(void *guest_code)
> > > {
> > > - uint64_t target_mpidr, obs_pc, obs_x0;
> > > struct kvm_vcpu_init init;
> > > struct kvm_vm *vm;
> > > - struct ucall uc;
> > >
> > > vm = vm_create(VM_MODE_DEFAULT, DEFAULT_GUEST_PHY_PAGES, O_RDWR);
> > > kvm_vm_elf_load(vm, program_invocation_name);
> > > @@ -83,31 +81,28 @@ int main(void)
> > > vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_ARM_PREFERRED_TARGET, &init);
> > > init.features[0] |= (1 << KVM_ARM_VCPU_PSCI_0_2);
> > >
> > > - aarch64_vcpu_add_default(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, &init, guest_main);
> > > - aarch64_vcpu_add_default(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, &init, guest_main);
> > > + aarch64_vcpu_add_default(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, &init, guest_code);
> > > + aarch64_vcpu_add_default(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, &init, guest_code);
Context from last patch.
> > >
> > > - /*
> > > - * make sure the target is already off when executing the test.
> > > - */
> > > - vcpu_power_off(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET);
> > > + return vm;
> > > +}
> > >
> > > - get_reg(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, ARM64_SYS_REG(MPIDR_EL1),
> > > &target_mpidr);
> > > - vcpu_args_set(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, 1, target_mpidr &
> > > MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK);
> > > - vcpu_run(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE);
> > > +static void enter_guest(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid)
> > > +{
> > > + struct ucall uc;
> > >
> > > - switch (get_ucall(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, &uc)) {
> > > - case UCALL_DONE:
> > > - break;
> > > - case UCALL_ABORT:
> > > + vcpu_run(vm, vcpuid);
> > > + if (get_ucall(vm, vcpuid, &uc) == UCALL_ABORT)
> > > TEST_FAIL("%s at %s:%ld", (const char *)uc.args[0],
> > > __FILE__,
> > > uc.args[1]);
> > > - break;
> > > - default:
> > > - TEST_FAIL("Unhandled ucall: %lu", uc.cmd);
> > > - }
> > > +}
> > >
> > > - get_reg(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, ARM64_CORE_REG(regs.pc), &obs_pc);
> > > - get_reg(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, ARM64_CORE_REG(regs.regs[0]), &obs_x0);
> > > +static void assert_vcpu_reset(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpuid)
> > > +{
> > > + uint64_t obs_pc, obs_x0;
> > > +
> > > + get_reg(vm, vcpuid, ARM64_CORE_REG(regs.pc), &obs_pc);
> > > + get_reg(vm, vcpuid, ARM64_CORE_REG(regs.regs[0]), &obs_x0);
> > >
> > > TEST_ASSERT(obs_pc == CPU_ON_ENTRY_ADDR,
> > > "unexpected target cpu pc: %lx (expected: %lx)",
> > > @@ -115,7 +110,34 @@ int main(void)
> > > TEST_ASSERT(obs_x0 == CPU_ON_CONTEXT_ID,
> > > "unexpected target context id: %lx (expected: %lx)",
> > > obs_x0, CPU_ON_CONTEXT_ID);
> > > +}
> > >
> > > +static void host_test_cpu_on(void)
> > > +{
> > > + uint64_t target_mpidr;
> > > + struct kvm_vm *vm;
> > > + struct ucall uc;
> > > +
> > > + vm = setup_vm(guest_test_cpu_on);
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * make sure the target is already off when executing the test.
> > > + */
> > > + vcpu_power_off(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET);
> > > +
> > > + get_reg(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET, ARM64_SYS_REG(MPIDR_EL1),
> > > &target_mpidr);
> > > + vcpu_args_set(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, 1, target_mpidr &
> > > MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK);
> > > + enter_guest(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE);
> > > +
> > > + if (get_ucall(vm, VCPU_ID_SOURCE, &uc) != UCALL_DONE)
> > > + TEST_FAIL("Unhandled ucall: %lu", uc.cmd);
> > > +
> > > + assert_vcpu_reset(vm, VCPU_ID_TARGET);
> > > kvm_vm_free(vm);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +int main(void)
> > > +{
> > > + host_test_cpu_on();
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > --
> > > 2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
> > >
> >
> > Hard to read diff, but I think the refactoring comes out right.
>
> Yeah, this one's nasty, sorry about that. Thanks for parsing it out, heh.
>
> > Please do this refactoring before adding the new test in the next revision,
> > though.
> >
>
> This is 10/11 in the series, and the test is 11/11. I'm not seeing any
> context belonging to the last patch, but perhaps I'm missing something
> obvious.
It's not much, but nicer to have none.
Thanks,
drew
>
> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Best,
> Oliver
>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
